Skip to main content

Full text of "The Second epistle general of Peter and the general epistle of Jude"

See other formats












Hontion: FETTER LANE, E.G. 



Berlin: A. ASHER AND CO. 

ILeipjig: F. A. BROCKHAUS 

efo gorfe: G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS 

Bombag anto Calcutta: MACMILLAN AND CO., LTD. 

All rights reserved 





Edited by 

Provost of King's College, Cambridge 


Cambridge : 

at the University Press 




(ZTamimljge : 



THE General Editor does not hold himself respon- 
sible, except in the most general sense, for the 
statements, opinions, and interpretations contained in 
the several volumes of this Series. He believes that 
the value of the Introduction and the Commentary 
in each case is largely dependent on the Editor being 
free as to his treatment of the questions which arise, 
provided that that treatment is in harmony with the 
character and scope of the Series. He has therefore 
contented himself with offering criticisms, urging the 
consideration of alternative interpretations, and the 
like ; and as a rule he has left the adoption of these 
suggestions to the discretion of the Editor. 

The Greek Text adopted in this Series is that of 
Dr Westcott and Dr Hort with the omission of the 
marginal readings. For permission to use this Text 
the thanks of the Syndics of the Cambridge University 
Press and of the General Editor are due to Messrs 
Macmillan & Co. 

Oct. 1912. 



IN the Introduction and Notes to these Epistles 
I have derived a large amount of help from the 
work of Professor J. B. Mayor (The Epistle of St Jude 
and the Second Epistle of St Peter, 1907), and also 
from that of the late Professor C. Bigg (in the Inter- 
national Critical Commentary, 1901), and also from the 
admirable articles by Dr Chase in Hastings' Bible 

I have thought it important, in view of the fact 
that the book will be used by schoolboys, to make the 
notes brief, and to be sparing in the number of refer- 
ences and illustrations. 

It is not usual or desirable that in books such as 
the present one new and untried theories should be 
advanced : but I have ventured to make some sugges- 
tions as to the Assumption of Moses and the Apocalypse 
of Peter. 

M. R. J. 

Oct. 1912 




The Connexion between 2 Peter and Jude x 

Explanation of the Connexion ... xii 


External Evidence xvii 

Internal Evidence. Kelation to 1 Peter . xxii 
Resemblances of Phrase and Vocabulary 

between 1 Peter and 2 Peter . . . xxii 

Differences ....... xxiii 

Relation to other Writings. Josephus . xxv 

The Apocalypse of Peter .... xxvi 

Other Indications of Late Date. . . xxviii 
Date. Other Writings attributed to St 

Peter xxx 

Can 2 Peter be called a Forgery? . . xxxii 

Contents of the Epistle .... xxxiv 


The Author xxxvi 

External Evidence xxxviii 

Contents xxxix 

Apocryphal Writings quoted by Jude. 

The Assumption of Moses ... xl 

The Book of Enoch .... xlv 




The Apocalypse of Peter .... Ivii 

The Apocalypse of Baruch . . . Iviii 





The reading of most of the Epistles in the New Testament is 
a difficult task for young students. The subjects with which 
they deal are to a .great extent abstract things of the mind. 
Words such as justification, grace, glory, and even faith, convey 
no very clear idea to a beginner. A proper name or a bit of 
narrative is welcomed as a relief. 

This is very natural. The real value of the Epistles can only 
emerge when more of life has been experienced : and yet it ought 
to be interesting at any period of life to know what were the 
thoughts of such men as Peter, Paul and John about the 
meaning of the facts which they spent their lives in telling to 
men all over their world. We shall be more apt to realize the 
living interest of the Epistles if we recollect that the men who 
wrote them were not trained from an early age to use a certain 
kind of language, but were for the most part making for them- 
selves the vocabulary which they used. 

The abstract words of which I spoke grace, justification, and 
the rest were not, as now, smooth stones from the brook, worn 
down by constant attrition, but were rather blocks freshly 
hewn from the quarry. By their first readers these letters were 
most anxiously looked for ; every word was of importance ; and 
they would determine the line of action and mould the daily life 
of a whole community. Moreover, on these documents, next to 
the reports of our Lord's own life and teaching, the foundation of 
the whole enormous structure of Christian theology has been 
raised. They have ruled the lines along which millions of 
Christian lives have moved. The Gospels are the most important 


books in the world, and the Epistles are only less important 
than the Gospels. " Une espe"rance immense a traverse la terre." 
The Epistles are among the first books written to show what 
effect this hope ought to have upon the lives of ordinary men and 

A beginner may perhaps have some notion of this : but I am 
sure that it will be good for him to remind himself of it, and to 
insist upon attaching some definite meaning to the words he 
reads. It is not to be expected that he will get as much out 
of them at an early stage of his career as will come in after 
years ; but at least, in setting out upon the study of these 
writings, he should start with the conviction that the writer 
whose work he is to read had a very clear idea of what he meant : 
that his words were addressed to simple people ; that the mean- 
ing of them can be attained in a measure by the simple as well 
as by the clever of our own days ; and that it is well worth 


The Epistles before us (2 Peter and Jude} must be studied 
together. It has long been recognized that there is a close 
connexion between them. No one can read the second chapter 
of 2 Peter and the Epistle of Jude without seeing that the 
authors must have used a common source, or else that one of 
them has borrowed from the other. 

An examination into this connexion is of primary importance : 
for the result of it must very materially affect our view of the 
value and authenticity of the two Epistles. We will therefore put 
this question at the head of our investigation, and will begin by 
placing side by side the words and passages in which the 
similarity is most strongly marked. 

2 Peter ii. Jude 

1. False teachers rbv ay op A- 4. Impious men stealing in: 
cravra aurovs SeairbTtiv dpoifyiej'oi. rov pbvov 8e<nr(>Tr)v /ecu utipiov ^0>v 


2. d<rAeia. 4. 



2 Peter ii. 

3. ofs TO Kplfw ZiciraXai OVK 

4. God spared not the angels 
who sinned but imprisoned them 
els Kpleiv Tijpovfj.frovs. 

4. ffeipois f60ou. 
6. Sodom and Gomorrha He 
destroyed, making them v-n-bdety^a 

10. TOVS biriffu ffapKbs tv tiri- 
iua.fffj.ov TropevofjL^vovs ical 


11. Kash and heady, these 
men 56as ov TptfAOvcnv /3\ao"07;- 
/toiWes, OTTOV ayye\oi l<rx^ 1 Ka '- 
dvvd/j.ei fjieifoves fibres ov <j>povcriv 
fear' OLVT&V irapa Ku/)t(^ j3\dcr<f>r}(j.ov 


12. OVTOI 5e, a> 

yevvrjfjL^a <j>v<TiKa ls...<j>6opdv, tv 
ofs dyvoovffiv p\aff<p'rjiJ.ovvTS t kv 
rr) <pdop$ abT&v ical <f>dapTfi<rovTai. 

13. ffwLXoi KQ.I 

rej tv rats aTrdrais or 

15. KaraXe/TrcwTes evdeiav odbv 
eir\a.vf)9^ffa,v ^a/coXou^crai'Tes Ty 
68$ TOV BaXaa^t...8s /Atcrdbv ddiidas 

17. ofrrol efoiv iryyai &vvopoi 
/cat 6/u.txXai UTTO XatXa?ros ^Xau^o- 

17. ols 6 f60os roG (r/c6roi;s re- 


4. ol TrdXat Trpoyeypa/,tvoi eis 
TOUTO TO Kplfj,a. 

6. The angels who left their 
habitation es Kpi<nv 


7. Sodom and Gomorrha irpb- 
Keivrai deiy/Aa irvpbs altovlov. 

7. (These cities) direXdowat 

8, 9. ffdpKa fitv [uaivovffiv, tcvpi6- 
5e ddTOv<ru>, 56^as 5^ |8Xa<r0?7- 
/j.ovffiv. 6 d MtxarjX 6 dpxdyyeXos, 
ore Ty 5taj86Xy 
yero irepl TOV 
ouic tTdX/jLTjo-ev Kplffiv 

10. ouTot 5e 6Va /u^i' ov/c otoaaiv 
(3\aff<j)'r)/jt.oi)o't.v, o<ra 5 0ua"i/cu>s wj 
Ta dXoya fya tiriaTavTai, h TOV- 
TOIS QdelpovTau 

12. OUTO^ etcrw' oJ e/ Tats a7d- 
Trats vfj,C)v o-TTtXdSes rarawqco^MMi. 


<rav t K 

12. ve<f>t\ai avvdpoL viro d 

TOU Kaiv 
ir\avr) TOV BaXad^u 

13. (d<TT^pes TrXavTjTat) ofs 6 


18. virtpoyKa yap /mTaibTvyros 16. Kal TO <rro';u,a avT&v XaXet 

III. 1. 

2. pvrjffdrivai TWV 

v inrb T&V ayiwv 

Kdl TT]S T&V d7rO<TTO\(i}V VfJi&V 

3. TOUTO irpGrrov 
OTL eXei/crovrcu eTr' < 
ijfj.fp&i' tv tfiiraiyfiovfi 
Kara, ras I8las 

17. 'T/xets 5^, dyainjToi, 
(jLvriffQiijTe T&V prjfMTiav TWV irpoei- 

~q^v(av virb T&V o.Tro<TTO\wv TOV 

KVpLoV TJfJiQv 'J.T]<70V X/)t(TToO. 

18. 6Vi \eyov vfuv 'Er' Ar^orou 
Xpbvov foovTai 


Kara Tas eavr&v eiridvfjdas iropevb- 


There are, besides this central passage, other striking resem- 
blances scattered through the text of the two Epistles. Thus 

2 Peter Jude 

I. 12. Ai6 fie\\^ff(i} &d fyuaj 5. 'YirofJLvrjo-au 8 iVia 

v irepi roi/rwi', Kalirep yucu, eidoTas aira irdvra. 

I. 5. (TTrouSV Trao-ap irapeior- 3. irarai' 

III. 1, 14, 17. dyaTTTjroi. 3, 17, 20. aya-n-rjToi. 

III. 14. ffTTOvdacrare &<rin\oi 24. T(p...dvva(jifr<j)...v/J.cis...ffTij- 

aury evpedyvai tv (rat Karev^iriov rrjs Sofrs avrov 


Now the connexion between the two Epistles will not be 
denied. How is it to be explained ? As was mentioned above, 
there are three possibilities, viz. : 

(a) 2 Peter and Jude were using a common source, written 

or oral. 

(6) Jude borrowed from 2 Peter. 
(c) 2 Peter borrowed from Jude 1 . 

With regard to (a). We may dismiss the idea that both 
writers used a single oral (or spoken) source. The resemblances 
of vocabulary are so minute that we could only entertain the 
notion by supposing that both writers heard the words spoken 
simultaneously that both took notes of a discourse spoken in 
their presence. 

It is a more plausible view that both used a single written 
source. But a groat objection to this theory is the fact that if 
we take away from Jude the portions common to it and 2 Peter, 

1 The fourth possibility, namely that the passages in question are 
interpolations, is one which, though it has been seriously advanced, 
need not be considered at any length. An examination of the 
language of 2 Peter such as has been carried out by Professor Joseph 
Mayor shows quite clearly that the similarities between it and Jude 
extend over the whole Epistle and are not confined to the particular 
i. 1 hi. 2. 


so little of the Epistle remains that one cannot see why it 
should have been written or preserved in preference to the 
source whence it was taken. Nor is it at all easy to imagine 
what the source can have been or by whom it was written. If 
it was so important that a great apostle and a venerated 
apostolic teacher both thought it worth while to borrow largely 
from it, how does it happen that the source itself has dis- 
appeared and left no trace of its existence ? 

The possibility remains that the prediction quoted in both 
Epistles (2 Peter iii. 3, Jude 1718) of the coming of the 
mockers may have been drawn from a third source : but if it 
should appear that one writer did borrow from the other, then it 
is a simpler and more probable supposition that the prediction 
was part of the matter borrowed. 

On the whole, then, we dismiss explanation (a) as improbable, 
and we are left to consider the other two possibilities that 
2 Peter is indebted to Jude, or that Jude is indebted to 
2 Peter. 

Each of these views has found many supporters of ability 
and distinction. To myself it seems likely that a majority of 
those who have regarded Jude as the borrower have been 
influenced by the feeling that, if 2 Peter is the borrower, that 
Epistle can hardly be regarded as the genuine work of the 
Apostle, and that it would be a disastrous admission to allow 
that a work which could be called spurious had found its way 
into the New Testament. The feeling is natural enough : but it 
should not be allowed to influence us in the search for the 
truth. We shall see later on that great difficulties have been 
felt at various stages in the history of the Church with regard to 
the authenticity and canonicity of 2 Peter, on other grounds 
besides the possibility of its indebtedness to Jude. 

But whatever may have been the attitude of those who 
approached the question, it does seem to me that the supporters 
of the priority of 2 Peter have failed to explain some of the 
principal difficulties which confront them. There is one passage 
at least in 2 Peter which appears to be almost certainly secondary 
in relation to the corresponding passage in Jude. 

2 Peter b 


This is 2 Peter ii. 11 compared with Jude 9 : 

They quake not at glories, and they blaspheme glories, 
blaspheming, whereas angels, But Michael the archangel, 

who are greater in strength and when he was speaking with the 

power, do not bring against them devil in controversy about the 

before the Lord (various reading body of Moses, did not presume 

from the Lord) a railing accusa- to bring against him a railing 

tion. accusation, but said "The Lord 

rebuke thee." 

Both writers are here illustrating the attitude of certain false 
teachers with regard to dignities (whether angelic or earthly) 
by contrasting it with the conduct of Angels. But while in 
2 Peter the illustration leaves us at a loss with regard to the 
incident referred to, the illustration in Jude is quite clear and 

It has been supposed that 2 Peter is referring to the Boole of 
Enoch. Two passages have been suggested. In one, the four 
great Archangels bring to God the complaint of men about the 
oppressions of the Giants, and receive God's sentence against 
the Angels whose offspring the Giants were. The point of the 
illustration is that the Angels refer the complaint to God, 
instead of themselves dealing with the sinful Angels. This 
explanation requires the (probably true) reading napa Kvp/ox In 
the other passage the Angels, called the Watchers, receive the 
judgment of God against the sinful Angels, and commission 
Enoch to announce it to the culprits. In other words, they 
shrink from announcing judgment to their fellows, but commit 
the task to a mortal. This interpretation requires us to read 
nap a Kvpiov. 

It is possible that one or other of these explanations may be 
right : but it will not be denied that the allusion is a very 
obscure one. Nor does it seem applicable to the particular 
offence which is here reproved, that of ft\ao-<pr)p.ia, or evil- 

As to Jude, on the other hand, no doubt exists as to the 
allusion. We have it on good and early evidence that it is taken 
from a book called the Assumption of Moses (of which more 
hereafter) : and it is appropriate ; for Satan had indeed 


blasphemed Moses, calling him a murderer, and perhaps also 
God, calling Him a liar. 

It is possible, to be sure, that Jude, writing with 2 Peter 
before him, and not taking the point of the allusion, substituted 
for it one which was clearer. 

But I submit that by far the more natural view is that 2 Peter 
is here putting into more general terms, and thus obscuring, an 
allusion in Jude which the writer considered to be of doubtful 

The probability that this is the case is increased by another 
consideration. Jude seems pretty clearly to quote the Assump- 
tion of Moses in one or two other places in the Epistle. One of 
these quotations recurs in 2 Peter in a form a little more remote 
from the original (Jude 16 TO crrd/ia avr&v AaXel urre'poyKa, 2 Peter 
ii. 18 i>7Tpoy<a yap /xaratorT/ros (0eyyd/oiei/oi) 1 . This is intelligible 
if 2 Peter quotes it through the medium of Jude : it is very 
difficult to believe that the converse process took place, and that 
Jude, penetrating the obscure allusions in 2 Peter ', referred back 
to the original source of them. 

Another aspect of the question, from the point of view of 
general probability, leads us to the same result. Assuming the 
dependence of one Epistle upon the other, we can put the possi- 
bilities of priority and genuineness in all their forms, as : 

(a] Both Epistles are genuine, and Jude borrows from 

2 Peter. 
(6) Both Epistles are genuine, and 2 Peter borrows from Jude. 

(c) Both Epistles are spurious, and Jude is the borrower. 

(d) Both Epistles are spurious, and 2 Peter is the borrower. 

(e) 2 Peter only is genuine, and Jude is the borrower. 

(/) 2 Peter only is genuine, and 2 Peter is the borrower (i.e. 

St Peter borrows from a spurious letter of Jude). 
(g) Jude only is genuine, and Jude is the borrower. 
(h) Jude only is genuine, and 2 Peter is the borrower. 

(a), (6) are tenable suppositions. The difficulty of (a) is 
that (as was said above) so little is left of Jude after 

1 See further p. xlv. 



the borrowings from 2 Peter have been removed, that it 

is difficult to account for its preservation. 
(6) is tenable. Its ultimate reception or rejection must 

depend on other considerations, 
(c), (d] are possible, but less likely than (a), (6). As to (c) : 

if Jude be the borrower and also spurious, one cannot 

imagine how it came to be written. This difficulty is 

but slightly lessened by the adoption of (d). 
(e) To this the same remark applies. 
(/) Extremely unlikely. Under what circumstances could a 

spurious Jude be so introduced to St Peter as to gain 

credit with him ? 
(g} Again, it is most unlikely that a spurious letter of 

St Peter could gain credence from Jude. 
(h} Tenable, and, like (6), depends for ultimate reception 

upon other considerations. 

Yet again, looking at the matter from the point of view of 
general probability : in view of the brevity of Jude, and of its 
likeness to 2 Peter, it is very difficult to imagine why it should have 
been deemed worthy of preservation if it were later than 2 Peter. 
We must remember that many Epistles of Apostles and apostolic 
men have almost certainly been lost : from St Paul's extant 
letters we can divine the existence of important letters written 
by him to leading Churches, which we no longer have. Jude 
is not definitely addressed to any special Church, nor is there a 
tradition that any particular community held it in high estima- 

To put the matter quite shortly, it is very difficult to account 
for either the writing or the continued existence of Jude (a short 
work by a person of whom little is known), except on the sup- 
position that it is a genuine work of the man whose name it 
bears. No such difficulty exists in the case of 2 Peter, which 
both contains more matter than Jude, and is current under a 
widely-known and honoured name. So far as the present 
argument goes, both Epistles may be genuine: Jude almost 
certainly is. 




We have seen reason for thinking that 2 Peter is later than 
Jude, and has borrowed from it. This state of things is con- 
sistent with a belief in the genuineness of 2 Peter. It is quite 
possible that the Apostle made use of the Epistle of Jude, whom 
he must have known and respected : and it would not be 
strange that he should make no acknowledgment of the bor- 
rowing. In older times Isaiah quoted a passage from Micah 
(Isa. ii. 1 4, Mic. iv. 1 3). Passages from earlier prophets are 
to be found in the later chapters of Jeremiah. The Gospel of 
St Mark is extensively used in Matthew and Luke. The idea of 
property as connected with an author's writings is not ancient, 
and was certainly not present to the minds of the New 
Testament writers. There is, in short, no difficulty and 
nothing derogatory in supposing that Peter borrowed from 
Jude without acknowledgment. 

But, apart from the borrowing from Jvde, is the genuineness 
of 2 Peter clearly established ? The answer to this question must 
be in the negative. We will examine the history of the Epistle 
and its reception. 

Complete collections of the early quotations and criticisms of 
the Epistle will be found in the commentaries of Professor Bigg 
and Professor Joseph Mayor (to mention the two most recent 
English editions). It will be sufficient to summarize their 
results here and to quote the most important. 

The phrases which are quoted from the Apostolic and sub- 
Apostolic Fathers (Clement of Rome, Barnabas, Hermas, 
Ignatius, Polycarp, Melito, Justin Martyr, Tatian, Irenaeus, 
the Martyrdom of Polycarp), as indicating an acquaintance with 
2 Peter, are wholly inconclusive. One expression which occurs 
in several of these writers as a quotation, 'H/iepa Kvpiov a>s 
^tXia err) (2 P. iii. 8), is a Jewish commonplace : something very 
like it is in Psalm xc. 4 : "a thousand years in thy sight are but 
as yesterday." 


There are two or three cases, on the other hand, where a 
reminiscence of the Epistle does seem probable. 

In the Apology of Aristides (possibly as early as 129 130 A.D.) 
we have f) 68bs rrjs dXrjdcias fJTts TOVS odevovras avrrjv els rrjv 
aivviov xetpaywyeT ftafriXeiav. This may combine recollections of 
two passages, 2 Peter ii. 2 77 68bs rqs d\rj6eias and i. 11 rj 4<rodos 
els TTJV alwviov fiaaiXeiav. 

In the Letter of the Churches of Vienne and Lyons (177 179 
A.D.) preserved by Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. v. 1) this sentence 
occurs (v. 1. 45) : 6 de did fifcrov Katpbs OVK dpybs avrols ovde 
ctKaprros eyevero. In 2 Peter i. 8 OVK dpyovs ovde d<dp7rovs Ka6- 
io-Trjo-iv. This is a marked resemblance. The same Epistle 
uses the word egodos to mean death, as does 2 Peter i. 15, and 
also has resemblances to the language of the Apocalypse of Peter, 
of which book more will be said. 

Theophilus of Antioch (t 183 185) has two phrases which recall 
2 Peter : (1) 6 \6yos avroC (paivatv (So-irep \v%vos eV oiK^ju-art 
0cbri(rej/ TTJV VTT* ovpavov. 2 Peter i. 19 \6yov to 
Troiflre TrpofTf^ovres MS Xv^ra) (paivovn ev avxp,r)pat TOTTG). 
(2) ot de TOV 6eov avQpwTroi 7rvevp,aTO<popoi Trvevp-aros dyiov KOI 
77 po<pf)Tai yevopevoi. 2 Peter i. 21 VTTO Trvevparos dyiov (pepopevoi 
e\d\rj(rav drrb deov dv6pa)7roi. 

Immediately after this date, in the writings of men who were 
younger contemporaries of Theophilus, we find quite clear 
evidence of the use of the Epistle. Thus we are distinctly told 
by Eusebius in the fourth century and by Photius in the ninth, 
that Clement of Alexandria (died about 213 A.D.) wrote notes 
upon all the Catholic Epistles in a lost work of his called the 
Hypoty poses, or Outlines. 

We have a Latin version, made by Cassiodorus or Cassiodorius 
in the sixth century, of some notes by Clement on 1 Peter, 1, 2 John 
and Jude. Cassiodorius contradicts Eusebius and himself, saying 
that Clement had not commented on 2 Peter, 3 John or Jude. 
But his utterances are confused, and the testimony of Eusebius 
is to be preferred.. One or two phrases in Clement's extant 
works recall 2 Peter, but there is no overt quotation in them. 

Hippolytus of Rome, who may have died about 225 A.D., has 

2 PETER xix 

several expressions which come very close to the language of 
2 Peter, e.g. (on Daniel iii. 22) <a yap av ns virorayr) TOVTM KO.I 
8f8ov\<0T(u, 2 Peter ii. 19 to yap ris tyrr^rat rovr<u SeSovXcorai. 

Origen, who died in 253, says of Peter that he left one Epistle, 
which is acknowledged, " and perhaps a second also : for there 
are doubts about it." The quotations from 2 Peter or allusions 
to it (about eight in all), which are found in Origen's works, all 
occur in works which are only preserved in a Latin version : 
and it is possible that these are due to the translator (Rufinus 
of Aquileia) and not to Origen himself. One phrase, however, 
which is characteristic of Origen's manner, and probably due to 
him, may be quoted. He is speaking (in his Homilies on 
Joshua) of the trumpet-blasts which preceded the fall of Jericho, 
and compares the utterances of the apostles to trumpets. 
" Peter, too," he says, " sounds aloud with the two trumpets of 
his Epistles." 

Firmilian, Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, writing to 
Cyprian about the middle of the third century, makes unmis- 
takable allusion to 2 Peter. So does Methodius of Patara in 
Lycia late in the same century. 

The Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius, written about 324, 
is the source to which we go for a well-considered expression of 
the opinion of that day as to the reception and status of the 
various writings in the New Testament. He speaks of the two 
Epistles of Peter together, and after saying that the First is of 
acknowledged authority, and was used by the elders of old time 
in their writings, says : " That which is circulated as the second 
Epistle has been handed down to us as not canonical (OVK 
cv8id6r)nov), but yet, since it has appeared useful to many, it 
has been held in estimation (eo-TrovbavBrj) along with the other 

In another place, in classifying the Scriptures of the New 
Testament as acknowledged (6p.oXoyovp.eva)) disputed (oWiAryd- 
/iei/a), and spurious (v60a) t he puts 2 Peter into the second class. 
" Of the books which are disputed, but yet well known to most 
(yvo)pip.o)v rols TroAXoI?) the Epistle of James is in circulation, 
that of Jude, and the Second Epistle of Peter." 


Jerome, whose authority became paramount in the Western 
Church through his great work of translating the Bible into 
Latin, expresses no doubt as to the authenticity of the Epistle 
in the letter to Paulinus, which was throughout the Middle Ages 
used as a preface to the Latin Bible. But in a collection of 
short notices of Church writers usually known as De viris 
illustribus (much of which is borrowed from Eusebius) he says of 
Peter that " he wrote two Epistles which are called Catholic : of 
which the Second is denied by very many to be his, because of 
the disagreement (dissonantia) of its style with that of the First." 

We need not prolong the list of testimonies drawn from the 
Fathers 1 ; but a word must be said as to the ancient versions of 
the New Testament into other languages. It is important to 
notice that 2 Peter was not included in any Syriac version 
older than the Philoxenian, of the sixth century. Again, the 
present Latin text of the Epistle, as Dr Westcott points out, 
" not only exhibits constant and remarkable differences from the 
text of other parts of the Vulgate, but also differs from the 
First Epistle in the renderings of words common to both." And 
he continues, " When it further appears that it differs no less 
clearly from the Epistle of St Jude in those parts which are 
almost identical in the Greek, then the supposition that it was 
received into the Canon at the same time with them (i.e. 1 Peter 
arid Jude} at once becomes unnatural." 

One interesting bit of evidence pointing in the same direction 
has been deduced by Dr Chase from the great Vatican manuscript 
of the Greek Bible, written in the 4th century, and known as B. 
This venerable book, like other manuscripts, divides the various 
books of the Bible into chapters or sections, by means of num- 
bers marked in the margin. Now in the Catholic Epistles there 

1 It may be well to mention quite shortly a number of important 
authorities of somewhat late date who express no doubt as to the 
Epistle and reckon it as Canonical: 

Athanasius, d. 373 (Alexandria), 

Cyril of Jerusalem, d. 386 (Palestine), 

Gregory of Nazianzus, d. about 391 (Asia Minor), 

Didymus, d. 394 (Alexandria), 

The 3rd Council of Carthage, 397 (Africa), 

Augustine, d. 430 (Africa). 

2 PETER xxi 

are two such sets of chapter-numberings, one older than the 
other. " This twofold division is found in all the Catholic 
Epistles except 2 Peter," from which we conclude that the 
manuscript from which B was copied, and which furnished the 
older set of chapter-numbers, did not contain 2 Peter. 

We must not altogether neglect the argument from silence. 
It is very noteworthy that some of the early Church-writers, of 
whom we have considerable remains, do not seem to have known 
the Epistle. Irenaeus is one of these : yet it must not be for- 
gotten that the Epistle of the Churches of Vienne and Lyons 
seems to quote 2 Peter, and that Irenaeus stood in close con- 
nexion with the author of this. Tertullian, many of whose 
works we possess, is another important instance. Yet here 
again some who lived in his time and in his country seem 
certainly to have known the Apocalypse of Peter, a writing which 
we are to consider in connexion with the Epistle ; I mean the 
writers of the Passion of St Perpetua (about A.D. 203). 

The Latin fragment called the Muratorian Canon, which 
expresses the views of some member of the Roman Church 
about 170 A.D. as to the authority of the N.T. books, has 
suffered from corruptions, and is difficult to understand in many 
places. The author of this appears certainly to mention the 
Apocalypse of Peter, and to omit the Second Epistle. Efforts 
have been made so to emend the text as to introduce a mention 
of 2 Peter : but I cannot think that they are either necessary 
or successful. 

On the whole we may say that the external evidence (with 
which we have been dealing) shows that a very hesitating recep- 
tion was accorded to 2 Peter by those writers of the early 
centuries who were best qualified to judge, and that it is weaker 
than can be produced in favour of any writing of similar import- 
ance in the N.T. 

In later times, at the period of the Reformation, such men as 
Luther, Calvin and Grotius felt great doubts as to the authen- 
ticity of the Epistle. Grotius put forward the untenable con- 
jecture that the author was Symeon, Bishop of Jerusalem, who is 
said to have been crucified in Trajan's time at the age of 120. 



We have now to consider the internal evidence afforded by 
2 Peter as to its authenticity and genuineness. It will be useful 
among other things to enquire how far it resembles the First 
Epistle, which was of acknowledged authority, and also to ex- 
amine certain likenesses to writings of later date which have 
been pointed out. 

With regard to the First Epistle (1 Peter] we must bear in 
mind that St Peter's claim to be considered the author of this 
has also been contested. 

For an investigation of the authenticity of 1 Peter this is not 
the place : I shall content myself with the statement that its 
position in comparison with that of 2 Peter is exceedingly strong. 
The question before us is whether 2 Peter so resembles it in 
style or in thought as to justify us in assigning both writings 
to the same author. 

In considering the question of style I shall avail myself of the 
exhaustive examination so admirably carried out by Professor 
Joseph Mayor in pp. Ixviii cv of his edition of 2 Peter and 


The salutation. 1 P. i. 2. 2 P. i. 2. x^P ls fy"" KC " ^p^rj 
7r\r)6w6eiT]. (An imitator, be it noted, is by no means unlikely 
to copy exactly such accessories as this : or a salutation may be 
following a common form.) 

2 Peter i. 3 TOV KaXearavros vpas 8ia 86r)s. Of. 1 Peter i. 15, 
ii. 9, 21, iii. 9, v. 10, in all of which God's calling is spoken of. 

2 Peter ii. 18 eV tmfofttwg a-apiaos do-eXycicus (and ii. 2). 
1 Peter iv. 3 TreTropfv/Jievovs ev doreXyeiais 1 , ejridvpiais. 

2 Peter i. 16 eVoTrrai. 1 Peter ii. 12 eVcn-revoi/rey (and iii. 2). 

2 Peter iii. 14 aWiXoi <a\ a/icopjroi. 1 Peter i. 19 


2 Peter ii. 14 dKaraTravo-rovs dpaprias (v.l. for a 
1 Peter IV. 1 Trenavrai dfiaprias. 

2 PETER xxiii 

Of a total of 100 words which are common to the two epistles 
there are very few which appear to Constitute what can be called 
a striking resemblance. They are the following : 

dvao-rpofpr), twice in 2 Peter, six times in 1 Peter : five times 
elsewhere in N.T. 

dir66f<ris, once in each epistle, nowhere else in N.T. 

apery, thrice in 2 Peter, once (in the plural) in 1 Peter : once 
elsewhere in N.T. 

do-\yia, thrice in 2 Peter, once in 1 Peter. 

aa-7n\os, once in each epistle : twice elsewhere in N.T. 


Words used in 1 Peter and not in 2 Peter. These amount to 
369, of which 59 occur only in 1 Peter and not elsewhere in N.T. 

Words used in 2 Peter and not in 1 Peter. These are 230 
in number, of which 56 do not occur elsewhere in N.T. 

There is enough here to justify the assertion (current as we saw 
above in Jerome's day) that there is a dissonantia between the 
styles of the two epistles : that "at all events the Greek of the 
one is not by the same hand as the Greek of the other" (Mayor). 
But this is not conclusive. St Peter may have employed Sil- 
vanus (1 Peter v. 12) to write the First Epistle in Greek at his 
dictation ; and may have employed another man as the vehicle 
of the Second. Are there, we must now ask, such differences or 
such similarities of thought as to help us to a conclusion ? 

For the answer to this question, again, Mayor's edition affords 
most valuable material. 

Under the head of resemblances he points out three topics 
which are common to the two epistles : the Second Coming, the 
saving of Noah from the Flood, Prophecy. 

As to the first : 2 Peter speaks of it mainly as the day of 
judgment and of destruction of the elements, and "seems to 
look forward to its being put off for an indefinite period." 
1 Peter dwells on it as the time for the revelation of Jesus 
Christ, of reward of the faithful, of glory and rejoicing, though 
the judgment of the wicked is also mentioned. 

As to the second : 2 Peter speaks of the Flood of water as 


illustrative of the possibility of a coming destruction of the 
world by Fire : and again, as a punishment of the ungodly in 
the ancient world, when Noah a preacher of righteousness 
was saved. 1 Peter uses the deliverance of Noah as an illustra- 
tion of baptism. Two similarities of language occur: both 
epistles speak of the paKpodv/j-ia of God 1 Peter in connexion 
with the Flood, 2 Peter in connexion with the final Fire. Both 
use the words &' vdaros 1 Peter of the saving of Noah, 2 Peter 
of the constitution of the present earth. 

The third topic, Prophecy, is treated of in the following pas- 
sages in the two epistles : 1 Peter i. 11, 2 Peter i. 21. It is not 
possible in this case to trace a marked resemblance or a marked 
discrepancy between the two writings. There is a touch of 
similarity between the statements of 1 Peter that it was re- 
vealed to the prophets on ovx favTols vp.1v 8e dirjKovovv avra a vvv 
avqyyf\r), and that of 2 Peter, ov yap OeXrjfiaTi dvdpwrrov 
TjvexOr) Trpo^rjTfia TTOTC, K.r.X. 

Under the head of Differences Mayor points out that, while 

1 Peter is full of allusions to the words and acts of our Lord, 

2 Peter has but very few such allusions. The following are all 
that can be collected under this head : 

The allusion to the Transfiguration, i. 16. 

The prophecy of Peter's own death, i. 14. 

The creeping-in of false prophets, ii. 1. (Also in Jude.) 

Denying the Lord. ii. 1. (Also in Jude.) 

The last state worse than the first, ii. 20. (Matt. xii. 45.) 

The day of the Lord as a thief in the night, iii. 10. 

(Matt. xxiv. 43.) 

These are mostly utterances of judgment, and severe in tone. 
1 Peter on the other hand dwells especially on love, faith, hope 
and joy as connected with the thought of Jesus Christ. 

Again, when we turn to the O.T., 1 Peter is full of allusions and 
quotations. In 2 Peter only five passages are marked as quota- 
tions by Hort : to which Mayor adds nine or ten other allusions. 
This is a strong point. 

It is worth while to quote Mayor's final conclusion (p. cv)- 
" On the whole I should say that the difference of style is less 

2 PETER xxv 

marked than the difference in vocabulary, and that again less 
marked than the difference in matter, while above all stands the 
great difference in thought, feeling, and character, in one word, of 


It was said above that suggestions had been made that 2 Peter 
showed obligations to certain writings of later date. 

First among these is the Antiquities of Josephus (completed 
about A.D. 94). Dr Edwin Abbott has pointed out very marked 
resemblances, as he considers them, between the Preface to this 
work and 2 Peter, and again in Josephus' description of the last 
words of Moses (Ant. iv. 8. 2). The most striking of these are 
the use of the phrases : ^vdois ft-aKoXovOfjo-avTes, ols KCIKWS Troir)- 
trere ^117 Trpoo-e^oi/res, dperr) of the excellence of God : and the 
saying of Moses to the general effect that he leaves behind him 
laws for the people that they may not take to evil courses. 
We have also the words TTJV /weyaAetor^ra rov $eoO, 6eov (frvcris, 
and a number of coincidences in the use of quite ordinary words 
and particles. 

It is possible to make a rather imposing list out of the 
materials: but upon examination it will be found that very 
few of the examples are strong. They do not include the most 
characteristic features of the Petrine vocabulary, and they are 
not evidence of borrowing ideas. It would be possible, moreover, 
to construct a very similar list of 2 Peter's coincidences with the 
language of Philo 1 : and in the Preface to the Antiquities 
Josephus is himself under an obligation to Philo. 

The true view of the resemblances probably is that they are to 
be reckoned as belonging to the ordinary literary Greek of the 
time, and not as evidence of use of the works of one writer by 
the other 2 . 

1 e.g. in the case of dperjj used of God. 

2 The phraseology of an inscription of about A.D. 22 (a decree of 
the town of Stratonicea in Caria) cited by Dr Deiasmann (Bible 
Studies, p. 360) shows similar resemblances to the language of 2 Peter 
(e.g. Tratrav o-jrovSijv elfffapeadai, TTJS deias Swa/iews operas). 



There is another writing under the name of St Peter which 
shows undoubted resemblances in language to 2 Peter, but 
whose spuriousness is universally acknowledged. This is 
the Revelation or Apocalypse of Peter. It does not exist in its 
entirety : there are a few quotations from it in early ecclesias- 
tical writers, and there is also a considerable fragment in Greek, 
which was discovered in Egypt in 1886 7, and published in 
1892 along with portions of the Book of Enoch and of the Gospel 
of Peter 1 . 

The book is very frequently spoken of by ancient writers 
and enjoyed a high reputation. The Letter of the Churches 
of Vienne and Lyons has probably derived some expressions 
from it. So, quite certainly, has the Passion of Perpetua. 
Clement of Alexandria wrote comments upon it : the Mura- 
torian Canon mentions it (adding that "some of our number 
refuse to have it read in church"), but, as we saw, does not 
speak of 2 Peter at all. Methodius (who does quote 2 Peter] 
quotes the Apocalypse as a "divinely inspired writing." Macarius 
Magnes (probably in the fourth century) quotes it, but not as 
authoritative. In the time of Sozomen (a fifth-century ecclesi- 
astical historian) it was still read once a year in some churches 
in Palestine. Eusebius classes it among the spurious writings. 

It was a short book, equal in length to the Epistle to the 
Galatians, and it is evident from the quotations that the chief 
subjects treated in it were the state of souls, especially sinful 
souls, in the next world, and the final judgment. The fragment 
we possess begins with the closing words of what is most likely 
a prediction of our Lord's about the end of the world. Then we 
find the Twelve with our Lord, upon a mountain. They ask 
Him to show them one of the righteous who have departed out 
of the world. Two men appear in a glorified form and great 
beauty, which is described in very glowing terms. Next, Peter 
is shown the abode of the blessed, and thereafter the place of 

1 There are many editions, e.g. Kobinson and James, Cambridge, 
1892; Preuschen, Antilegomena, 1901. On a recent discovery of 
another text see the Additional Note, p. Ivii. 

2 PETER xxvii 

torment, to which the greater part of the fragment is devoted. 
The punishment of various classes of sinners is described, and 
the principle enunciated that the torment corresponds to the 

The book draws its materials, to some extent, from Greek 
sources. Those who were initiated into the Orphic mysteries were 
taught to believe in punishments and rewards allotted very much 
on the lines which are laid down in this Apocalypse. In this lies 
the explanation of what has been noted in the Apocalypse, 
namely, that there are similarities between it and the Sixth 
Aeneid. The truth is that in that book Virgil also is employing 
Orphic literature. 

The influence of the Book of Wisdom is also, to me, very 
perceptible in the Apocalypse. 

The following phrases and passages in the Apocalypse show 
marked similarity with 2 Peter. 

1. TroXXot e avrwv eaovTai \|/-evSo7r pofprJTai 2 Pet. ii. 1. 

doy/jLctTa TToiKiXa rrjs drraXfias 8iddf-ovo~iv 

ras ^v^as eavrwv 8oKip,dovTas. ii. 8 

6 6fbs...Kpivci TOVS vlovs TTJS dvopias. ii. 3 (ols TO 

K7ra\ai OVK apyet). 
2. The Apostles go els TO opos i. ] 8. 

ff\66vT(t)v d-rro TOV Kocrpov egoSov i, 15. 

TToraTroi' et<ri iii. 11. 

6. I saw fTcpov TOTTOV avxMP v ndvv i. 19. 

Ko\a6fivot ii. 9. 

ot P\a(r(j)r)novvTS ri)v ofibv TTJS diKaioo-vvrjs ) .. 

tii, \ cj\\ ~ A ~ r 11. 2, 15, 21. 

ot afpevTcs Trjv ooov TOV ueov J 

dfj.eXf](ravTs Trjs evToXijs TOV 6fov ii. 21, iii. 2. 

8. @6pf3opos 15. CKV\IOVTO ii. 22. 

Fragment in Macarius Magnes 

The heaven and earth are to be judged iii. 10, 12. 

The principle of 2 Peter ii. 19 w yap TIS ^rrqrai rourw de8ov\a>Tai 
(which is itself perhaps derived from Wisdom xi. 16, xii. 2, 27, 
xvi. 1, 2) underlies a great part of the Apocalypse. 


In view of these passages it has been held that the two 
writings come from the same hand, or that one is under an 
obligation to the other. To me it seems safest to class them 
together as works composed in the same circle but not neces- 
sarily by the same author, and as perhaps containing expan- 
sions of teaching which tradition possibly trustworthy had 
handed down as coming from the Apostle. 


The result of our investigations so far has been to suggest that 
2 Peter is not a genuine work of the Apostle. It is unlike 1 Peter 
(whose claims to be regarded as genuine are strong), it borrows 
from Jude, it resembles another undoubtedly spurious Petrine 
work. In addition to this its reception in early times was 
by no means general : strong doubts were felt about it in the 
3rd and 4th centuries. 

Other indications which confirm the idea of its late date are 

(a) The allusion to the Epistles of Paul (iii. 15, 16). First, 
the definite mention of the writings of one N.T. author by 
another is unique, and, in itself, rather suspicious. Paul and 
Luke mention writings of their own (and Luke speaks of others 
unnamed who have drawn up narratives of the life of Christ) : 
but the reference here, partly commendatory, partly warning, is 
of a different kind. It points, moreover, to a time when Paul's 
Epistles were collected and read by Christians ; and it is difficult 
to resist the feeling that the words a>s <al ras \onras ypafyas 
do place the Epistles on a level with Scripture. Is this a state 
of things easily conceivable before 64 A.D., the probable date of 
St Peter's martyrdom? 

(6) Again, take the words of the mockers (iii. 4) who say 
" Where is the promise of His coming ? for, since the fathers fell 
asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of 
creation." These words surely point to a time when the first 
generation of Christian witnesses had passed away. It is pos- 
sible, of course, to regard the passage as referring to the more 
ancient prophets : yet this is not satisfactory. It is more natural 
to look upon it as the expression of the thought of the actual 

2 PETER xxix 

writer a man living after the date of the apostles and eye- 
witnesses of Christ. A further indication of the same kind 
is given in the words T>V dnoo-To\a>v v^.a>v (iii. 2), which may 
include the writer, but, again, are more naturally interpreted as 
drawing a distinction between the writer and the Apostles. If 
this is the case, we must admit that the writer was inconsistent 
with himself : see the notes on i. 1 3. 

(c) The reference in i. 14 to our Lord's prophecy of St Peter's 
death is most naturally explained (on the assumption that the 
Epistle is not by St Peter) by a reference to the Gospel of St John 
(xxi. 18). But if he is referring to the written Gospel we must 
place him after 100 A.D. 1 

(d) The description of this Epistle as "the Second" written 
by the author gives to me the same impression as does the 
reference to Paul : namely that the First Epistle had been long 
current and was of recognized authority. But there is nothing 
in this that can be described as a proof of late date, and it must 
be remembered that certain critics of distinction (e.g. Dr Zahn) 
take the view that the "first epistle" here mentioned was not 
our 1 Peter, but a lost letter addressed to the church (whatever 
that was) to which 2 Peter was written. 

(e) In i. 15 the writer speaks of a further work which he 
proposes to put forth, the effect of which will be to keep alive in 
the minds of his hearers, after his death, the remembrance of his 
teaching. Some have thought that the work here referred to is 
the Gospel of Mark, which, according to a probably true tradition, 
contains the teaching of St Peter. In that case we should here 
have another reference to a N.T. book, and another suspicious 
feature in a writing which we already regard with more than 
suspicion. But we must also allow for the possibility that by 
the promised writing we are to understand the Apocalypse which 
told of the napovo-ia of Christ (cf. i. 16) or even the Preaching of 
Peter (see below): for I think we must exclude the Gospel of 
Peter, which seems to have nothing in common with 2 Peter. 

(f) The reference to the Transfiguration (i. 17, 18) is yet 

1 For another possible explanation of the allusion see the notes 
in loc. 

2 Peter c 


another instance of overt confirmation of other N.T. literature ; 
precious if occurring in a work of unquestioned authority, but 
operating unfavourably in this case. 


On the whole Professor Mayor inclines to place the date of 
2 Peter somewhere in the second quarter of the second century, 
i.e. between 125 and 150 A.D. To myself it seems that this may 
be slightly too late, and that the first quarter (100 125) is a 
very possible date. In assigning this earlier date I am in- 
fluenced by the consideration of the other Apocryphal writings 
connected with St Peter's name : the Apocalypse, the Preaching, 
the Gospel, and the Acts 1 . 

The Apocalypse we have already examined and have seen that 
its language shows strong likenesses to 2 Peter. We have to 
consider next the book called the Preaching (Kt)pvyp.a) of Peter. 
Of this we have important fragments quoted by Clement of 
Alexandria : in the principal passage the religions of the Greeks, 
the Egyptians, the Jews, and the Christians are described and 
contrasted. Now, it seems fairly clear that the Apology of 
Aristides is indebted to the Preaching : the Apology has been 
dated at 129 130 or 140. In it we have also found (p. xviii) what 
seems a clear reference to 2 Peter. I do not think it is possible 
to trace resemblances between the language of 2 Peter and of the 
Preaching. Yet the following may be cited. 

Preaching. The Greeks by worshipping creatures as gods 
d^apio'Tova'i ro> $eo> did TOVTWV apvovpevoi avrov clvai. 2 Peter ii. 1 
rov dyopdo~avTa avrovs fteaTroTrjv dpvovp,cvou And also there is 
an emphatic reference to the prophetic scriptures as foretelling 
the circumstances of our Lord's life. Cf. 2 Peter i. 19. 

The Preaching does not seem to have been in any way a 
heretical work. Its origin has been with probability assigned 
to Egypt, on the ground of the references to Egyptian idol- 
worship, with which the writer seems to have been familiar. 

1 The fragments of the Apocalypse, Preaching, and Gospel may be 
consulted in Preuschen's Antilegomena, 1901 ; the Acts in Lipsius- 
Bonnet, Acta Apost. Apocrypha I. 

2 PETER xxxi 

The Apocalypse has likewise been assigned to Egypt. The mix- 
ture of Jewish and Greek ideas which it displays was certainly 
to be found there in great vigour. 

The Gospel of Peter is of a different complexion. It was 
probably written about 150 A.D., and seems certainly to have 
used all our four Gospels. It is characterised (in the fragment 
which we possess of it) by a violent hatred of the Jews, and also 
by a wish to show that the sufferings of our Lord in His Passion 
were only apparent : in other words, that His human body was 
not really a body like ours, but only a seeming one : in yet other, 
and technical, language, the author held the Docetic view of the 
Incarnation. This doctrinal tendency caused an orthodox bishop 
(Serapion of Antioch, A.D. 190 203) to denounce and condemn 
the book as heretical. Here again no important resemblance of 
thought or language to 2 Peter can be found. It is likely enough 
that the Gospel was written in Syria. 

Lastly the Acts of Peter. There are apocryphal Acts of Peter 
current in profusion, in many languages and of many dates : but 
those with which we are here concerned exist partly in Latin and 
partly in Greek (and Coptic), and were written perhaps as late 
as 200 A.D. (but as I think somewhat earlier) by a person who, 
though he may not have left the Church, clearly held the Docetic 
view of our Lord's person. In this book there is an account of 
the Transfiguration which evidently echoes the language of Z Peter 
(in the words "Dominus noster volens me maiestatem suam 
videre in monte sancto," cap. xx). We have in it also the story of 
a prophecy by our Lord of St Peter's crucifixion, altogether 
different from that in John xxi. which was possibly suggested 
by the language of 2 Peter. These Acts are the latest of the 
writings which we are considering. 

It seems to me that these Petrine apocrypha fall into two 
groups. The earlier consists of the Apocalypse and the Preaching 
(and 2 Peter}, which may have been written in Egypt in the first 
quarter of the second century : the later of the Gospel, followed 
at some interval by the Acts, which may both come from Asia 
Minor. Of these the Apocalypse and 2 Peter are most closely 
allied, while the Preaching is used in 130 or so by a man 



(Aristides) who also knew 2 Peter. The Gospel, whether by 
accident or not, shows no trace of 2 Peter; but the Acts do. 
They, however, were written at a time when 2 Peter was cer- 
tainly current. 

I have referred above to the possibility that the earlier group 
of Petrine apocrypha may contain true reminiscences of the 
Apostle's teaching. This may be especially true of the Preaching, 
but it is also to be kept in mind with regard to the Epistle and the 
Apocalypse. We have not, at the date which I assign to these 
writings, reached the epoch of the active production of Christian 
apocrypha, and the earliest of such pure inventions as we do pos- 
sess differ from the Petrine group in that they are " tendency- 
writings," composed for the purpose of inculcating some peculiar 
form of doctrine. There is then the possibility that some frag- 
ments of genuine Petrine matter may be contained in all three 
of these writings. 


But the question remains : Is not the writer of 2 Peter guilty 
of forgery in issuing a document under St Peter's name which 
St Peter did not write? It is quite certain that such a pro- 
ceeding, if carried out in our time, could not be qualified by any 
other name. But in the second century the situation was a very 
different one. We must consider the habits of the time. There 
are in existence a large number of writings belonging to the 
years immediately preceding the composition of 2 Peter, which are 
fathered upon Jewish patriarchs and prophets or upon pagan seers. 
What was the intention of their real authors with regard to them ? 
and how were they regarded by their readers? Take, for in- 
stance, the Apocalypses which were written soon after the destruc- 
tion of Jerusalem : those of Ezra (2 Esdras in our Apocrypha) 
and Baruch. Their ostensible authors are men who lived at the 
time of the other great catastrophe of the Holy City, under 
Nebuchadnezzar, and they try to explain the causes of the 
present troubles of Israel and hold out prospects of a future 
re-establishment of the polity and of happiness in another world. 
They are meant to come to the oppressed people like a cheering 

2 PETER xxxiii 

strain of music out of the distance, or the beloved and familiar 
voice of one no longer seen, bringing the message which that 
voice would have spoken in life. They are no more meant to 
deceive than is an ancient folk-tale that tells of the perils 
and ultimate triumph of a hero : and to such tales they may 
fairly be likened, except that they have a more serious purpose 
and a more sacred form. But just as the children who hear the 
fairy tale believe it, and as it passes into the daily dramas of 
their games, so but few decades passed before these Apocalypses 
were put on a plane which their writers had not intended them 
to occupy, and were ranked with the ancient scriptures, which 
they were only designed to recall and interpret. This result 
shows the mischievous nature of the device innocently adopted 
by the Apocalyptic writers. There was danger inherent in it. 

As soon as the Christian Church began to regard certain of its 
early representatives in the same light as the patriarchs and 
prophets of Israel, and to look upon their writings as "Scripture," 
the possibility of using their names as the names of Jewish 
heroes had been used came into existence, and along with it 
came the danger inherent in the device. At first, as I have 
suggested, the non-authentic writings that were fathered upon 
the Apostles were such as may have embodied real reminiscences 
of their teaching. But very soon the device was employed with 
the mischievous purpose of gaining credence for special forms of 
doctrine for which insufficient support was to be found in the 
older scriptures. It is in these circumstances that we are justi- 
fied in applying the name of forgery to apocryphal writings. 

Applying these considerations to 2 Peter, I think of it as the 
work of a man who was confronted with a special crisis. Two 
forms of false teaching were current in his circle : one that of the 
Libertines, the other that of the deniers of the Second Coming. 
There was need that the members of his church should be reminded 
of the teaching of the first preachers of the word upon these points. 
Those preachers had predicted the coming of false teachers, and 
had inculcated the uncertainty of the time of the Second Coming, 
on the authority of our Lord Himself. To meet the danger of 
the Libertine teaching he borrows and expands the words of an 


Apostolic writer ( Jude) who himself refers back to the Apostles : 
to meet the other error he quotes, it may be, real words of St Peter 
or else an ancient writing in the prophetic manner : and he puts 
the whole of his warning into the form of a letter from St Peter, 
feeling that he is taking the attitude which St Peter himself would 
have taken, and, perhaps, knowing that he is to a great extent 
using words which were handed down to him as St Peter's own. 

If there were an element of conscious deceit connected with 
the writing, it must have lain principally in the manner in which 
the Epistle was introduced to the Church. If it was produced 
as a new discovery, or if a romance was invented to explain its 
having been previously unknown, then we cannot wholly acquit 
the writer. But if the document were recognized by those to 
whom it was read as a crystallizing of oral apostolic teaching 
put forward to meet a particular difficulty, we shall be still able, 
even if we dislike the device which the writer adopted, to 
think of him as a man of sincere purpose and not as a designing 


The contents of the Epistle, shortly summarized, are as follows : 

i. 1. Greeting to the sharers of the writer's faith. 

2 4. The knowledge of God, who has called you, makes it 
possible for you to attain the highest life and partake of the 
Divine nature and escape the corruption of the world. 

5 7. Let your belief in God lead you to cultivate certain 
virtues, culminating in Love. 

8. This process will make your knowledge of God and Christ 
of practical and operative value. 

9 11. Neglect of it induces blindness of the soul. Beware of 
this and make your calling a reality. This will lead you into Life. 

12 15. It will be my care to remind you of this as long as I 
live (which will not be long), and to provide you after my death 
with the means of remembering. 

16 19. My teaching to you was not based on delusion but on 
my personal experience, for I witnessed the Lord's glory. And 
that sight made me the surer of the value of the prophets. 

2 PETER xxxv 

You rightly value their guidance in the dark interval which 
precedes the full day. 

20, 21. Remember that prophecy is not a matter of private 
interpretation, any more than, when first uttered, it came at the 
will of those who uttered it. 

ii. 1 3. But, besides true prophets, there were false prophets 
in Israel, and so there will be among you. Their immoral life 
will bring discredit on the Christian name. But they will not 
remain unpunished. 

4 9. God did not spare the angels who sinned by lust, nor 
the men before the Flood (who also sinned by lust), noc. the 
cities of the Plain. Yet in these instances punishment was not 
indiscriminate. Noah and his family were saved from the Flood, 
and Lot from Sodom. Both of them had protested against the 
wickedness around them. So we see that it is in God's power 
and is His practice to destroy the wicked and deliver the good. 

10, 11. The false teachers are very bold and high spoken, 
and make light of the leaders of the Church, but they will come by 
a fall. 

12 16. They give themselves up to animal enjoyment and will 
die the death of brutes. They make the assemblies for worship 
the means of dissipation, and of pecuniary gain for themselves, 
reminding us of Balaam. 

17 19. Unproductive of any good, they do actual harm, 
especially to those newly turned from paganism, and this 
under the specious name of Christian freedom, whereas they are 
really slaves to their vices. 

20 22. The pity is that they ever became Christians at all. 
They have lost all the reality of the Christian life, and their end 
is worse than their beginning. 

iii. 1, 2. This is the second letter I have written to you : both 
are meant to keep alive in your minds the messages of the 
prophets and apostles which you have heard. 

3, 4. And especially remember that they warned you of men 
of loose life, who should rise up among you and should deride 
the idea of our Lord's return to judgment. 

5 7. They forget that the world is created subject to change. 


There was a great catastrophe in the old time when the whole 
race of men was wiped out by a flood of water, and we believe 
that another is to come when fire will be the instrument of 

8, 9. And as to the delay of the Second Coming. Time has 
no place with God. A thousand years are nothing to Him. He 
is waiting in order to give all men a chance of repentance. 

10 13. Nevertheless He will come when He is least expected : 
and should not that thought lead you to prepare yourselves for 
His coming, in your life- walk ? you must be righteous if you are 
to inhabit a kingdom of righteousness. 

14 16. Try then to keep a clear conscience before God, and 
think of Him as the God who waits patiently to ensure your 
salvation. That is the teaching of my brother Paul in his letter 
to you ; and in his other letters he has much to say on these 
topics, which must be studied with care, since, like the other 
scriptures, they have put wrong ideas into the minds of ill-informed 
readers, who are not grounded in the faith. 

17 18. You are forewarned : keep to your principles and 
grow in the knowledge of Christ: to whom be glory. 



The author of the Epistle of Jude describes himself in his 
opening words as a servant of Jesus Christ and brother of James. 
By this James it is usually held that we are to understand 
James the Brother of the Lord, author of the Epistle and first 
Bishop of Jerusalem, who, according to the story preserved by the 
early Church historian Hegesippus, ended his life a martyr, 
having been precipitated from a pinnacle of the Temple shortly 
before the siege and destruction of Jerusalem. This Jude or Judas 
will therefore be identical with the person mentioned in Matt, 
xiii. 55 as a Brother of Jesus. He is the last in the list there 
given, " James and Joses and Simon and Judas," and last but one 
in Mark vi. 3. The controversy that has been waged over the 
meaning of the words "Brother of the Lord" need not occupy us 

JUDE xxxvii 

here. It has been held that they were (a) sons of Joseph by a 
former marriage, and so older than Jesus ; (6) sons of Joseph and 
Mary, younger than Jesus ; (c) not really brothers at all but cousins. 
We gather from 1 Cor. ix. 5 that more than one of them was 
married 1 . 

As to the life of Judas or Jude, the Brother of the Lord, 
we know absolutely nothing. But there is a story, told by 
Hegesippus and preserved by Eusebius, about two of his 
grandsons. Domitian had ordered all descendants of David to 
be put to death. These men were therefore informed against by 
certain heretics, as being of the seed of David and of the kindred 
of the Christ. They were brought before Domitian, who, like 
Herod, had heard of the " coming" of Christ, and was afraid that 
it implied a political disturbance. The men confessed their 
descent from David, and being further questioned, stated that 
they owned between them property to the value of 9000 denarii 
invested in land, which they cultivated themselves ; and showed 
their horny hands as a proof. Asked concerning the kingdom of 
Christ, they said that it was not temporal or terrestrial, but 
would come at the end of the world when Christ should 
return to judge the quick and dead, and reward every man 
according to his works. Domitian discharged them unharmed, 
and revoked his edict against the Davidic clan. 

The two men became bishops of churches, and survived till 
the time of Trajan. Eusebius does not give their names, but in 
another source they appear as Zoker and James : and it is 
probable that this additional detail is derived from Hegesippus. 

If Jude's grandsons were alive in Trajan's reign, what do 
we gather as to Jude's own date ? Mayor gives the following 
estimate, on the hypothesis that Jude was younger than our 

Jude may have been born in 10 A.D., may have had sons before 
35 A.D., and grandsons before 60 A.D. In the first year of 
Domitian (81 A.D.) he would have been 71. If the Epistle was 
written in 80 A.D. he would have been 70 and his grandsons 

1 For a full discussion see Lightfoot's Galatians, 252 sqq., and 
Mayor on the Epistle of St James, v. sqq. 


about 20. There is nothing in the story to indicate at what 
time in Domitian's reign the interview took place. 

If Jude was older than our Lord and was born shortly before 
6 B.C., and if his Epistle was written between 75 and 80, he 
would be an old man (85 or so) but not incredibly old : his 
grandsons would be over 40 when brought before Domitian. 

As to Jude's position in the Christian community, and as to 
the special Church to which his Epistle is addressed, we are 
quite in the dark. Two points only emerge. Jude writes as one 
whose word will command respect : and he is known at least 
by name, but probably more familiarly to his readers. In v. 3 
he speaks of having already contemplated writing to them in 
more general terms about the Christian hope, when the sudden 
appearance of false teachers among them compelled him to write 
at once, and to meet the special crisis, the Epistle which we 
have. We ; may naturally deduce from his words that the con- 
templated writing would have been something in the nature of a 
pastoral Epistle. 

We may place the community to which he writes very much 
where we please : Dr Chase's conjecture that it was at or near 
the Syrian Antioch is as good as any. There is no reason for 
confining our view to Palestine. 


The external evidence for the Epistle of Jude may be given at 
less length than that which concerns 2 Peter. We have seen 
reason for thinking that 2 Peter copies Jude, and that 2 Peter 
may be assigned to the first quarter of the second century. It is 
therefore an early witness to the existence of, and to the respect 
felt for, Jude. 

In the Teaching of the Apostles or Didache, a second-century (?) 
document, there is a probable allusion to Jude 22: Did. ii. 7 
ov picrtjo'cis iravTa avdpanrov^ dXXa ovs pv eAeyets, Trepl de <ov 
IT po<Tvr), ovs 8e aya^o-eis. 

The Epistle of Polycarp and Martyrdom of Polycarp (155 A.D.) 
give the same form of greeting as Jude 2 eXeos (tyui/) <ai 
nai dycnrr) 7r\r)6vv6eir). 

JUDE xxxix 

The Muratorian Fragment of about 170 A.D. says : "Epistola 
sane ludae et superscript! lohannis duae in catholicis habentur." 

There are quotations with and without specification of source 
in the Paedagogus and Stromateis of Clement of Alexandria, and 
also comments (from the Hypotyposes, in a Latin version) on 
the text. Tertullian names the Epistle. Theophilus of Antioch 
and Athenagoras (cir. 180) probably allude to passages in it. 

Origen mentions it with commendation : and in another place 
with the words " if anyone should accept the Epistle," words 
which point to doubts being entertained of its authority. 

Eusebius classes it with James as controverted but well- 
known and recognized : and elsewhere as not mentioned by 
many old writers, but yet as having been publicly used in the 
churches. It exists in the Old Latin but not in the Syriac 
(Peshitto) version. 

The opposition to it indicated in the words of Origen and of 
Eusebius seems to have been due to its use of apocryphal 
writings. This, at least, is the reason definitely given by Jerome. 
The nature of the objection shows that it arose in an age when 
criticism had begun, and therefore not in the very earliest times. 
We may fairly think of it as having been most vigorous in the 
great Antiochene school, where Christian scholarship was 
strongest, and may couple this idea with the fact of the 
exclusion of the Epistle from the Syriac version. 


The contents of the Epistle may be shortly summarized thus : 
1, 2. Greeting. Mercy, peace, love to you. 

3. I was engaged in writing to you generally about our 
common salvation when circumstances compelled me to desist 
from this and write at once urging you to stand fast to your 

4. For I hear that false teachers have made their appearance 
among you, men whose final destiny was long ago foreseen (by 
Enoch) : whose teaching amounts to a perversion of grace into 
lust and a denial of their Redeemer. 


5 7. I warn you against following them. Remember that 
Israel, redeemed (as you have been) from Egypt, perished in the 
wilderness. (This applies to their fate and yours if you follow 
them.) Then again, remember the punishment of the angels who 
(like these teachers) were guilty of backsliding : and that of the 
cities of the Plain who were ruined (like these) through lust. 

8 11. Besides their other evil courses these men have 
no respect for authority, celestial or human ; they are highly 
abusive. How different from Michael the chief angel, who did 
not rail against even the fallen angel, but appealed to God. 
These men, I say, are abusive, and also brutally ignorant. They 
recall the angry disobedience of Cain, the covetousness of 
Balaam, the rebelliousness of Korah. 

12, 13. Greedy and unproductive, they are men who might 
have been useful had they kept within bounds ; but they have 
strayed hopelessly from the path. 

14 16. Their end was foreseen (as I said) by Enoch the 
primeval seer : speakers of hard things he called them, and so 
they are. 

17 19. You see that this crisis was not unforeseen. Besides 
Enoch, the Apostles predicted the coming of such men. They 
are the " separators " you have read of, and though they arrogate 
to themselves the name of " spiritual " they are just the reverse. 

20 23. Follow them not : keep your faith as it was taught to 
you : pray : keep in communion with God : look to Jesus Christ. 
Do your best to save those who have joined or are likely to join 
the false teachers : but there is danger in the contact with them : 
be alive to that. 

24, 25. And so to Him who is able to preserve you from all 
such danger be glory. 


Two Jewish apocryphal writings, the Assumption or Ascension 
of Moses and the Book of Enoch, are indisputably quoted by Jude : 
a fact which, as we have seen, operated unfavourably with some 

JUDE xli 

upon the reception of his Epistle. Something shall be said here 
as to the nature and contents of both these books. 

But with regard to the difficulty which has been felt by many 
as to the use of apocryphal books by New Testament writers, it 
may be remarked that it is less a matter for surprise that they 
should be quoted at all than that they should be quoted so 
seldom ; and, further, that in all probability if we possessed the 
Jewish apocryphal literature in a more complete state than we 
do, we should recognize the existence of a good many more 
allusions to it than we now can. It is clear, for instance, that 
portions of the imagery of the Eevelation of St John are 
derived from the Book of Enoch, and that St Paul was acquainted 
with, and alludes to, more than one apocryphal book. The men- 
tion of Jannes and Jambres (2 Tim. iii. 8) may be due to such a 
book : the same Assumption of Moses which Jude quotes seems to 
be cited in Gal. iii. 19. And the allusion to the " Rock which 
followed " Israel in the wilderness is at least derived from Jewish 
legend. Again, the influence of the Wisdom of Solomon is 
clearly perceptible in James and in Hebrews, and it is probable 
that Enoch is quoted in 1 Peter as well as in Jude. In the 
Christian writings which stand next in date to the N.T. (e.g. the 
Epistles of Barnabas and Clement) the use of apocryphal writings 
is conspicuous. A long process of criticism was needed before the 
claim of these books to an authority resembling that of the O.T. 
was finally set aside, and the ill effects of using them recognized. 
The men of the first century had no such means as we now 
possess of judging whether a writing presented to them as 
ancient, and enjoying the respect of large circles, really deserved 
that respect or not. 

We need not then think it derogatory to the good sense of 
Jude or to the worth of his Epistle that he should have made 
use of books which were valued in his day and which he had 
been brought up to regard with reverence. 

His first plain allusion to the Assumption of Moses is in the 
well-known 9th verse a passage which has probably excited 
more curiosity than any other in the minds of his readers. It 
runs thus : 


" But Michael the archangel when he was speaking with the 
Devil in controversy (or when, contending with the Devil, he was 
speaking) about the body of Moses, did not presume to bring 
against him a railing accusation, but said The Lord rebuke thee." 

Now that this illustration is drawn from the Assumption of 
Moses is expressly attested by several writers of early date who 
knew that book, namely Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Didymus. 
Quotations from the same book are made by the first two of these 
three writers, and by others of later date. 

The name of the book occurs in several lists of apocryphal 
writings, together with a statement of its length, which shows 
it to have been of the same length as the Revelation of St John. 

In 1861 a large fragment of an old Latin version of it was 
discovered in a palimpsest manuscript at Milan by Ceriani, the 
celebrated Librarian of the Ambrosian Library. This fragment 
which may contain the first third, or rather more, of the whole 
book, gives us the means of judging of its date and character : 
and a recent editor, Dr R. H. Charles 1 , considers it to have been 
written between A.D. 7 and 29, by a member of the Pharisaic 
party in Palestine, who wished to urge upon his fellow-believers 
the adoption of a policy of quietude and patience, as opposed 
to that spirit of national self-assertion and rebellion against 
Rome, which ultimately led to the destruction of Jerusalem. 

The portion of the book which we have in a continuous form 
unhappily does not contain the episode quoted by Jude. The 
contents of it, shortly summarized, are these : 

In the 120th year of Moses and 2500th year of the world 
Moses calls Joshua to him and gives him the charge over the 
people, seeing that his own death is at hand. Joshua is to take 
into his keeping the books (probably the Pentateuch) which 
Moses will give him. Then a long prophecy of the course of 
Israel's history is given by Moses, bringing it down to the times 
of Herod the Great, and the domination of the Sadducean party. 
Thereafter (at a time which is really in the future as regards the 
actual writer of the book) a terrible tyrant a sort of Antichrist 
is to come and persecute the faithful, and, after this, the final 
1 The Assumption of Moses, 1897. 

JUDE xliii 

judgment of Israel's enemies and their deliverance is to take 

Upon hearing this and the announcement of Moses' approaching 
death Joshua is overwhelmed with grief, falls at Moses' feet, 
and utters a lament over the departure of his master, and his own 
unfitness to succeed him. Moses raises him up, sets him in his 
own seat, and comforts him by an assurance of God's faithfulness 
and the continuance of His care for Israel, whom He will never 
forsake. And here the fragment ends. 

The rest of the story of the book as known to Jude has to 
be pieced together from various short quotations made by church 

It must be remembered that in the long fragment the scene is 
laid, not on the mountain where Moses died, but in the camp. 
There is reason for thinking that in the book Joshua next 
accompanied Moses to the mountain, and Moses saw the land of 
promise. Then Joshua returned to announce the death of Moses 
to the people, and to summon Caleb. The people from below 
saw a cloud of light surrounding and covering the place where 
Moses was. Michael with other angels came to receive his soul, 
and bury his body. It is probable that just before the moment 
of death Moses held a dialogue with God, in which he refused to 
allow his soul to be separated from his body, like that of other 
men, by the angel of death, and that God eventually kissed him, 
and at the kiss his soul left the body (this at least is a constant 
feature of the story in rabbinic tradition). 

At this point, perhaps certainly after the moment of the death 
of Moses we may place the contest between Michael and Samael 
or Satan. Michael and his angels were preparing to bury Moses, 
when Samael appeared and said that the body was his, because 
he, Samael, was the Lord of matter. Michael withstood him 
with the words "For of His Holy Spirit all we were created," 
and again " From the face of God His Spirit went forth and the 
world came into being." In other words Samael is not the Lord 
of matter : all things were created by God. And probably it was 
in connexion with this that Michael charged Samael with having 
done his best to mar that creation : for we are told that he 


accused the devil of having inspired the serpent to become the 
means of Adam and Eve's transgression. 

But Samael had another accusation in reserve. Moses, he 
said, was not deserving of burial at all : he was a murderer, for 
he had slain the Egyptian (see Exod. ii.). This blasphemy 
doubtless kindled the wrath of Michael, but he restrained 
himself, and instead of retorting that Samael was a murderer 
from the beginning, he said, " The Lord rebuke thee, slanderer 
(Sia/3oAe)," in the words of the angel in Zech. iii. 1 

It is most likely that at this reply Samael fled in confusion. 
We gather that his object in trying to obtain possession of the 
body of Moses was that the Israelites might be induced to make 
a god of it and worship it. 

After the flight of Samael the angels proceeded with their task. 
It seems that Joshua and Caleb may have been witnesses of the 
dispute, as they certainly were of the concluding scene. They 
were now borne up by the Spirit into the air and saw a marvellous 
sight : Moses appeared in two forms. One (the soul) was being 
carried up by angels into Heaven ; the other the body was 
being buried in a rocky gorge, also by the hands of angels. Of 
these two witnesses, one, Caleb, was unable, owing to his more 
earth-bound character, to see so clearly or so much as Joshua, 
but descended to earth sooner. Joshua, however, remained until 
all was accomplished, and upon his return to the camp described 
all that had passed to the people. One detail of the story was 
that so pure was the body of Moses that the angels contracted 
no ceremonial uncleanness from contact with it, and needed not 
to purify themselves. 

It is not beyond hope that some further light may be thrown 
upon the course of this very interesting story by future researchers. 
In the mean time the above must stand as the best and fullest 
reconstruction I am able to provide. 

1 One authority tells us that Satan "also said that God had been 
guilty of deceit, in bringing Moses into the land which He had sworn 
that he should not enter." It is not clear that this is taken from 
the Assumption. It would supply good ground for an accusation of 
blasphemy on the part of Michael : but the words Kpl<nv p\acr<frr]fjilas 
do not (probably) mean more than a railing accusation. 

JUDE xlv 

But the verse which has served as our text so far is not the 
only allusion in Jude to the Assumption of Moses. In v. 16, 
immediately after the express quotation from the Book of 
Enoch, we read, " These are murmurers, grumblers, walking after 
their own lusts, and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, 
respecting persons for the sake of profit." The clauses which I have 
italicized have been thought (and, as it seems to me, quite 
rightly) to be quotations from the Assumption. In the Latin 
fragment we have a prediction of the domination of a set of men 
(pretty certainly the Sadducees) whose vices are described at 
some length (Chapter VIL). It is said (vn. 7) that they will be 
querulosi, which corresponds to Jude's fMp^JpaipM, and in vil. 9 
os eorum loquetur ingentia cf. Jude, TO crro^a avrwv AaXeT v7rfpoy<a. 
And earlier in the book (v. 5), where a similar class of wicked 
rulers is being prophesied, it is said of them erunt mirantes 
personas cupiditatum (perhaps locupletum or nobilitatum) et 
acceptiones munerum (Jude davp-d^ovres 7rpocra>7ra ax^eXia? ^apiv). 

Further (and this point has not, I think, been noticed before) 
in Jude 19 we have the words Ovroi clo-iv ol dirobtopl^ovres 
(rendered "These are they that make invidious distinctions," 
Mayor). In the verse of the Assumption quoted above (vil. 7) 
the word querulosi is immediately preceded by exterminatores, 
which has usually been taken as meaning "destroyers," but 
which, I think, is probably a too-literal rendering into Latin of 
the same Greek word aVoStopi^oire? that is used by Jude ; or at 
the least, of a word of similar sense. 


The other apocryphal book which is certainly quoted by Jude 
is the Book of Enoch. My account of this may be shorter, 
inasmuch as the book is extant in a complete form, and accounts 
and editions of it are accessible without much difficulty 1 . 

The Book of Enoch as we have it (and apparently as Jude also 
had it) is a book of considerable length, made up of portions 
belonging to various dates, from about 160 B.C. to a time not 

1 e.g. E. H. Charles's edition, 1893. 
2 Peter d 


later than the Christian era. We possess it in an Ethiopic 
version (made from Greek and this, again, from Hebrew), and 
also a portion of the text in Greek, discovered in 1886 7 in 
Egypt ; besides smaller fragments in Greek and Latin. Its con- 
tents are very various. At the beginning is an account of the 
sin of the angels who mingled with the daughters of men and 
begat the race of giants : of how Enoch was commissioned to 
denounce to them their guilt and its punishment: of how he 
was conducted by angels over the universe, and was translated. 
In other sections of the book there are disquisitions on the 
movements of the heavenly bodies, visions of the history of 
Israel, parables, the story of the birth of Noah, and prophecies 
of various kinds. The influence of the book is perceptible in 
several parts of the N.T., and not least in the Revelation of 
St John. 

This very interesting writing or collection of writings is known 
as the Book of Enoch, par excellence ; there is another important 
Revelation of Enoch (usually called the Secrets of Enoch] which 
exists only in Old Slavonic : and there is a third very much later 
Vision in Armenian. But the older Book of Enoch was long 
regarded with great veneration in the Christian Church: and 
indeed has, both in itself, and because of the use made of it by 
Christian writers, a strong claim on our respect. 

The use made by Jude of Enoch is considerable in proportion 
to the length of his Epistle. Most obvious is the quotation in 
v. 15: "To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that 
are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they 
have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which 
ungodly sinners have spoken against him." The Greek of this, 
as it appears in the Egyptian MS., is as follows : En. i. 9 on 
*PX Tai ^ >v TO ^ S (rals} p.vpido'iv avrov KCU rols ayiocs auroO Troirjarai 
Kara TrdvTav, KOI diro\(Ti rovs d 

(rap/ca Trepi iravTatv <Crcov> epycav avTcitv u>v rja-eftrjorav KCLT* avrov 
t do-f/3ftg, which differs from Jude, but has in common 

therewith the words I have underlined. The Ethiopic, as 
translated by Dr Charles, reads : "And lo ! He comes with ten 

JUDE xlvii 

thousands of His holy ones to execute judgment upon them, and 
He will destroy the ungodly and will convict all flesh of all that 
the sinners and ungodly have wrought and ungodly committed 
against him." 

The clause Trepi iravT&v r<5i> a~<\r^pwv (v e\d\r)(rav /car* avrov IB 
not from En. i., but, as it seems, from xxvii. 2 nepi rfjs 86r)s 
avrov o-<\rjpa \a\jj(rov<nv. 

The introductory phrase of Jude, "Enoch the seventh from 
Adam," occurs in En. Ix. 8 "My grandfather was taken up, the 
seventh from Adam." 

No less certain, though less obvious, is the use made of Enoch 
in v. 6 "And the angels which kept not their own dignity but 
left their proper dwelling-place hath He reserved unto the judg- 
ment of the great day in eternal chains under darkness." 

The story of these angels, who came to earth and mingled with 
the daughters of men, occupies a large place in the early chapters 
of Enoch, and besides the general allusion, Jude is the debtor to 
Enoch for some phrases: En. xii. 4 speaks of the angels "who 
have abandoned the high heaven and the holy eternal place" : in 
x. 5 are the words, "Cover him (i.e., Azazel, one of the principal 
offenders among the angels) with darkness, and let him dwell 
there for ever": x. 12 "Bind them. ..until the day of their 
judgment": xxii. 11 "unto the great day of judgment." And 
in liv. 3 sqq. the immense chains prepared for the hosts of Azazel 
are shown to Enoch. 

Passing over other less striking resemblances to Enoch (which 
will be recorded in the notes on the text of the Epistle) we have 
a third clear instance of quotation in v. 13, "wandering stars, to 
whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever." 'Ao-re'pes 
irXavrjrai, be it noted, in this verse, does not mean planets in our 
sense of the word, but stars which have deserted their appointed 
orbits. Compare En. xviii. 14, where Enoch is shown "the 
prison of the stars and the powers of heaven; and the stars 
that are rolling in the fire are those which have transgressed the 
precept of the Lord in the beginning of their rising, for they went 
not forth in their season, and He was wroth with them and 
bound them until the season of the accomplishment of their sin, 


ten thousand years." And xxi. 2 sqq., "I beheld... a place of 
disorder (dKarao-Kfvaa-Tov) and terrible... and there I saw seven 
stars of the heaven bound.... These are those of the stars of 
heaven which transgressed the command of the Lord, and were 
bound here until they fulfil ten thousand years." In later 
chapters (Ixxx., Ixxxvi., Ixxxviii., xc.) are allusions to the sin 
and punishment of stars (which, however, here represent the 
sinful angels): they are bound in an abyss which is narrow, 
deep, horrible and dark. 

It may be remarked that this bringing together within the 
limits of a short Epistle of so many passages from different parts 
of Enoch argues that Jude must have known the book very 
intimately and regarded it with great veneration. 


One of the sayings anciently attributed to our Lord, but not 
recorded in the Gospels, is " There shall be schisms and heresies." 
Whether He uttered the words or not, they are almost a common- 
place in the writings of the Apostles, and especially in those of 
Paul. There were, indeed, bound to be differences and divisions 
so soon as a new outlook upon life was opened up to the world at 
large. Men of all races and classes were being invited to 
become members of a single community : that community had 
only the most rudimentary organization, and was constantly 
being confronted with questions to answer and moral problems 
to solve. The moment that one of its answers or decisions was 
rejected or disputed, schism or heresy began. These two words, 
familiarized to us by the Litany, are invested with a mysterious 
and sinister atmosphere. We are tempted when we hear them 
to imagine men who take a demoniac pleasure in devising evil 
doctrines and misleading the simple. In truth, there were 
schismatics and heretics who seceded from the Church from 
motives of ambition or with a view to sensual enjoyment ; but 
there were also many who acted from honest conviction. Of the 
latter kind were some of those whom we hear of in the New 
Testament ; I am thinking principally of the Judaizers the 

JUDE xlix 

reactionary party. We know the terms in which St Paul 
speaks of them. If we may judge, however, from the language 
of Jude and 2 Peter the schismatics with whom the writers of 
these two Epistles had to do were of a lower order. 

Let us see what are the main accusations brought against them. 
Jude says that they changed the grace of God into lasciviousness 
and denied our Lord (4), indulged in fleshly lusts (7, 8), spoke 
evil of dignities (8, 9), were greedy of gain (11, 16), discontented 
and conceited (16). 

2 Peter repeats these accusations (except that of discontented- 
ness), but lays more stress upon the luxurious habits of these 
persons, and adds that they promise liberty to their hearers 
(ii. 19). In iii. the writer speaks of men who throw doubt upon 
the Second Coming ; it is not clear that they are the same 
persons who are attacked in ii. 

There are two features here which may point to unor- 
thodox teaching on the part of the accused; but the main 
stream of the invective is directed against their general conduct 
and bearing. Of the two charges which relate to teaching, the 
first is expressed rather differently in the two Epistles : in Jude 
we have " denying our only Master and Lord Jesus Christ " ; in 
2 Peter, " denying? the Master that bought them." To be sure 
this may be but another reference to conduct : the false teachers 
deny Him in their lives ; indulge in practices incompatible with 
the rules He has laid down. So Titus i. 16, 0e6i/ 6/zoXoyocrii> 
eldevai, rots de epyois apvovvrai. But 2 Peter connects it with 
the bringing in of alpea-fis aTrcoXttay, and with both writers it 
seems to be the head and front of offending. And since we know 
that erroneous teaching as to our Lord's Person was rife in early 
times, there is no good reason to doubt that such teaching is 
aimed at here. There were various types of it. Simon Magus a 
shadowy and problematical figure enough is represented as 
thrusting Jesus aside altogether and arrogating to himself the 
position of a divine being. Cerinthus, who is traditionally said 
to have been contemporary with St John, held, in common with 
other men who had been brought up in Jewish circles, that 
Jesus was only associated with the Divine Power at His baptism, 


and deserted by it at His crucifixion. Again, the docetic teachers 
denied the objective reality of the Incarnation. The human 
life of our Lord was but an appearance : His body was not 
tangible : He did not eat or drink : He was not really crucified. 
The apocryphal Acts of John, a product of this school of thought, 
put these words into John's mouth, "Sometimes when I would 
lay hold of Him, I met with a material and solid body, and 
again at other times when I felt Him, the substance was im- 
material and bodiless." Another form of teaching, the offspring 
of a mixture of pagan ideas, both Greek and Oriental, with 
Christianity, made Him one of a multitude of supernatural 
beings, one link in a mystic genealogy proceeding from the 
Supreme Being, and thus even if unintentionally detracted 
from the unique significance of His Person. Such teaching it 
is roughly labelled as u Gnostic " was commonly combined 
with a docetic view of the Incarnation. These were the 
main tendencies of unorthodox teaching about our Lord, and 
any of them might be described as a denial of the Master. 

The other charge is that of "promising liberty to their 
followers." This is stated openly in 2 Peter ; a phrase in Jude, 
" turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness," may perhaps 
be taken to be of the same import. Either of two evils may 
have been in the mind of the writers. There is, first, the 
exaggeration of the Christian liberty which St Paul preached 
the making into it a "cloke for licence." A man might say 
that restrictions such as those laid down in the Apostolic decree 
of Acts xv. were not binding upon enlightened persons like him- 
self, though very proper for weaker brethren: and this would 
lead him to unrestrained intercourse with the heathen, to the 
eating of meats offered to idols, and so forth : in fact, to the 
practices which are condemned in the earlier chapters of the 
Revelation, and are there associated with the names of Balaam 
and of the Nicolaitanes. Secondly, there is the view that since 
the body, in common with all other material things, is evil, no 
abuse of it can affect the soul, of which it is the temporary 
prison. A tradition preserved by Clement of Alexandria 
attributes to Nicolaus the deacon, the supposed founder of the 

JUDE li 

Nicolaitane sect, the precept " Abuse the flesh." Some (in- 
cluding probably Nicolaus himself) interpreted this to mean 
" Mortify the flesh," and lived an ascetic life : others indulged 
themselves in every gratification of the senses and called this 
abusing the flesh. It is to such antinomians (of whom there were 
many groups in the second and third centuries, distinguished by 
the names of their leaders or their special tenets 1 ) that the words 
of our Epistles would best apply. 

The other excesses attributed in Jude and 2 Peter to the false 
teachers are characteristic of many who have combined high 
pretensions with low aims. They have arrogated to themselves 
the right to speak, in defiance of the constituted authorities 
with whom they have quarrelled ; they have traded on the 
readiness of their simple-minded hearers to supply them with 
bodily comforts ; and they have jealously insisted on a recog- 
nition of their own superiority. Such teachers might be only 
schismatics, not heretics : that is, their doctrine might be 
orthodox enough, and only their attitude towards the main 
body of the Church incorrect. But we have seen that there is 
ground for thinking them to have held wrong views upon cardinal 
points of Christian theology and conduct. 

Denunciations of false teachers are found in other parts of the 
New Testament. We remember the "wolves in sheep's clothing" 
and the "false Christs" of the Gospels. These are special 
forms of error combated by St Paul in Colossians and Ephesians, 
and mentioned in Philippians. The Pastoral Epistles are full of 
invective, which reminds us far more closely of 2 Peter and Jude 
in its general tone : only here little is said of sensuality and 
impurity ; indeed, we are told that some of the teachers are 
ascetics, " forbidding to marry and commanding to abstain from 
meats" (1 Tim. iv. 3). Covetousness, however, and mercenary 

1 Notably the Carpocratians, with regard to whom Clement of 
Alexandria says "It was a propos of these and similar heresies, 
I think, that Jude in his epistle said prophetically : Likewise also 
these filthy dreamers (for not even in their dreams do they approach 
the truth) down to and their mouth speaketh great swelling words" 
(Strom, m. 2, p. 515). 


practices are mentioned more than once. In the Epistles of 
St John the denial that Jesus is the Christ, and the denial of 
His coming in the flesh, are specially mentioned. In the 
Revelation of St John, as noted above, the teachers of Balaam 
and of the Nicolaitanes are singled out. What one notices is 
that the accusations of our Epistles and of the Pastorals are, 
generally speaking, vaguer than those found elsewhere, and that 
it is extremely difficult to draw a distinct or consistent picture 
from them. 

Nothing has been said so far as to those who questioned the 
Second Coming (2 Pet. iii.). The passages quoted in the notes 
show that there were some Jewish thinkers of not very dis- 
similar views. But we are also reminded of the teaching of 
Hymenaeus and Philetus (2 Tim. ii. 17, 18), " who concerning 
the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past 
already." Similar to this is the doctrine attributed in an early 
book, the Acts of Paul, to Demas and Hermogenes, that "the 
resurrection has already taken effect in our children (i.e. that in 
our children our own life is perpetuated) and that we rise again 
by attaining to the knowledge of the true God." That is a 
view not unknown to philosophers of our own days. We cannot 
wonder that all such teachings should have been strongly con- 
demned by the first preachers of Christianity, when we consider 
their probable effect either upon men who had been always 
brought up to look for a day of reckoning, or upon those who 
had just been assured that such a day was coming, and coming 
shortly. The sudden removal of such an incentive to watchful- 
ness and sobriety would in the large majority of cases be highly 
mischievous, and we see from his concluding words that the 
author of 2 Peter regarded the matter from that point of view, 
"Seeing then that these things are to be destroyed, what 
manner of men ought you to be in holy conversation and godly 

JUDE liii 


Of the Greek manuscripts written in uncial letters 1 , which 
contain the Catholic Epistles including 2 Peter and Jude, the 
three oldest give us the complete text, viz. 
{>$ Sinai'ticus, at Petersburg : ivth century. 
A Alexandrinus, at the British Museum : vth century. 
B Vaticanus, at Rome : ivth century. 
Besides these 
C Codex Ephraemi rescriptus, at Paris, vth century, 

contains the greater part of the text ; 
K Mosquensis, at Moscow, ixth century ; and 
L in the Biblioteca Angelica at Eome, ixth century (late), 

are complete ; 
and P Porfirianus Chiovensis, at Kief, ixth century, is nearly 


Investigation of the "cursive" or minuscule manuscripts is 
still progressing. A recent editor of the text of our two Epistles 
(J. de Zwaan, Leiden, 1909) appears to distinguish four im- 
portant groups, each headed by a single manuscript, which I will 
enumerate : 

13. Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale Gr. 14 : ix xth cent. 
27. London, British Museum, Harleian MS. 5620: xvth 


214. Lambeth Palace Library 1182: xn xmth cent. 
100. Moscow 334 : xith cent. 

Of ancient Versions into other languages the most important 
for our purpose are 

I. The Old Latin, i.e. the Latin version or versions anterior to 
the revision made by St Jerome. The principal remains of this 
for our Epistles are in 

(a) The Palimpsest of Fleury, Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale 
(Latin, 6400 G) of the vth century, which contains 
2 Pet. i. 1 to ii. 7. 

1 i.e. roughly speaking, in capitals. Such manuscripts are classed 
by themselves as belonging to an earlier period than those which are 
in cursive or minuscule letters, i.e. in ordinary running hand. The 
" uncials " are distinguished by letters of the alphabet, the " cursives " 
by numerals. 


(6) The Freising fragments at Munich of the vnth century, 
containing 2 Pet. i. 1 4. 

(c) The passages quoted in two collections of Biblical texts 

called the Speculum Augustini and the Speculum 

(d) Quotations made by Lucifer, bishop of Cagliari in 

Sardinia, who died in 371. 

II. The Philoxenian Syriac Version, made for Philoxenus, 
bishop of Mabug or Hierapolis, about 508. This was the first 
rendering into Syriac of our Epistles. 

III. The revision of this made by a successor Thomas of 
Harkel (Heraclea), about a century later and called the Hark- 

IV. The Egyptian or Coptic Versions, namely the Lower 
Egyptian, formerly called Memphitic, now usually Bohairic, and 
the Upper Egyptian (in a different dialect), formerly called 
Thebaic, now Sahidic. The former is complete, the latter 


The Greek text of both these Epistles contains some doubtful 
passages. The text of the N.T. differs from' that of classical 
authors in this, that we have so many copies, versions and 
quotations from it going back to a very early date, that there 
are very few places in which we are justified in saying that the 
text is corrupt, and in calling in the help of conjecture to restore 
it. But both in 2 Peter and in Jude there are such places. 

(1) The first is in 2 Peter iii. 10 KOI yfj KOI ra eV uvrfi epya 
vpf6r}o-erai. This is the reading of the two earliest Greek MSS. 
X and B and of the later uncials KP as well as of one of the 
Syriac versions. The older Egyptian version (called Sahidic) 
reads oi/x fvpedrjcrerai. The second-best uncial as we may call 
it (A) and another (L) with two versions reads KaraKc^o-erai, 
another good uncial (C) a^avia-B^ovrai. Later MSS. (followed 
by our Received Text) give Kavdf)<rTai or KaraKavdrja-ovrai, The 
Latin Vulgate omits the clause. 


The words as they stand do not yield a right sense : that is 
certain. We need instead of evpcdrja-crat a word which shall 
mean "destroyed" in some form. The simplest way of mending 
the passage is to insert oi^ as the Sahidic version does : and 
this may after all be the right solution. The negative may 
have been omitted by the writer himself or by his first copyist. 
The phrase o\>x cvpedrjvai in a similar connexion may be illus- 
trated from Apocalyptic writings. Thus Daniel xi. 19 has : /cat 
irpoo-Koyjsfi KOI 7re<reirai KOI ov% evpfflijo-fTai. JR,ev. xvi. 20 KOI 
irao~a vrjo~os ecpuyev, <al oprj ov% fvp(drjo~av (cf. xii. 8 ovde TOTTOS 
cvpcdrj avT&v eri ev r<u ovpava) : xviii. 14 KCU iravra ra \nrapa KCU 
TO. XajnTrpa aTTtoXero diro (rou, <al OVKCTI ov JJ.T) aura c\ipr](Tov<riv 

(this being a periphrasis for the passive) : xviii. 21 fi\r)0f)<rTai 

Ba/3uXa>i>...Ka! ov pr) fvpfBff eri '. XX. 11 e(f)vyfv rj yrj /cat ovpavos, 
nal TOTTOS ovx fvpetir) avTols. Compare also the passage quoted 
from the Sibylline Oracles in the note on this verse. A passage 
from the " Second Epistle of Clement," quoted in the Note on 
the Destruction of the World by Fire (p. 35), gives ground for 
another suggestion. 

Another way, very simple in itself, but producing a very forced 
turn of language, is to read the sentence as a question (Weiss), 
"the earth and the works that are therein, shall they be found?" 

The other readings of the MSS. KaraKavdrjo-fTai and the like 
give the right sense, but do not in any way account for the 
presence of eupe^o-erai. This must be the oldest reading: it 
could not have been changed into any of the others. 

Other conjectures which are worth mentioning are 
or some compound of it (Hort), 

De Zwaan (1909). 
Another, not, I think, recorded in print, was suggested by the 
late Henry Bradshaw, and is worth recording, ra ev avrfj epya 
dpya evpfdrjarerai. 

(2) In Jude 5 "I wish to remind you... on Kvpios (or 'l 
\aov ex. yfjs \iyv7TTOv craxras TO Sevrepov roiis p 


Kvpios is read here by KG and the mass of later copies. 
'Irjcrovs by AB, five cursive MSS., the Latin, Egyptian, Ethiopic 
versions and several Fathers. 6 debs by another small group. 
'Irja-ovs is the "best attested" reading in the view of Hort, but 
"can only be a blunder." His explanation is interesting. It is 
that the original text had 

OTIO A&ON, etc., 

that the letters OTIO were wrongly read as oriTc (Tc being the 
universal early abbreviation for 'Irjo-ovs) and also perhaps as 
OTIKC (abbreviation for Kvptos). 

(3) In Jude 22, 23, is the hardest passage of all. Let us first 
take the reading of the Received Text and Authorized Version. 

KOI ovs p.ev e'Xeetre 8ia.Kptvop.evoi 

ovs de ev <poj3(d crd>ere e< rov irvpbs dprrd^ovres, pio-ovvres KCU 

rbv drrb rfjs (rapicbs (nri\<0p.evov ^trwi/a. 

Then the text of Tischendorf and Tregelles (which is that of 
the "Alexandrine" MS., A) 

KOI ovs p.ev eXeyftf 

ovs 5e (ro)^T e< irvpbs 

ovs de e\a.T ev <^o/3cp, p,io-ovvTs K.r.X. 

Then that of Westcott and Hort (which is that of the Vatican 
MS. B): 

KCU ovs p.ev eXeare SiaKpivopevovs o-eb^ere CK rrvpbs 
ovs de eXeare ev $o/3a>, p,i<rovvTS K.r.X. 1 
To these we must add : 
N ovs p-ev eXeare diaKpLvo 
ovs 8e o-ca^ere e/c rrvpbs 
ovs 8e e'Xeare ev 0o/3a), p,io~ovvTes K.r.X. 

(i.e. as A, but with e'Xeare for e'Xey^ere in the first clause). 
C ovs pev e'Xe'y^ere 8ia<pivop,evovs 

ovs de (rto^ere e*K rrvpbs dprrd^ovres ev 0d/3oj p,i(rovvTs. 

1 De Zwaan, II Petrus en Judas (1909), reads ovs per 
*dia.Kpivofdi>ovs*, ovs de tic rrvpbs aprrdfere * ev 06/Sy*, and apparently 
regards the marked words as interpolations. 

JUDE Ivii 

In these various texts one principal difference is that some 
(AX) give three clauses, others (textus receptus, BC) only two. 

The Latin, Egyptian, Ethiopic and Armenian versions have 
three clauses, Clement of Alexandria two. The Syriac versions 
agree with him. 

The text of B is very awkward : we must translate it thus : 
And those on whom you have compassion as waverers, save, 
snatching them from the fire: but on others have com- 
passion in fear, etc. 

That is, we must take the first ots as a relative pronoun and 
the second as a demonstrative ; and the first e'Xeare as indicative 
and the second as imperative. 

Hort's suggested remedy is to omit the first e'Xeare and render 
"and some who are waverers save... but on others have com- 
passion in fear, etc." 

It is almost as simple to suppose that ovs (8e) has dropped out 
after diaKpivofj-evovs, which ends with the same letters. And it is 
rather difficult to account for the presence of eXey^ere. 

On the whole, if a satisfactory interpretation of the words can 
be given, I incline to agree with Mayor in adopting the text of A, 
which keeps e\eyx T an( ^ gives three clauses 1 . 


The Apocalypse of Peter. 

Since my account of this Apocalypse (pp. xxvi xxviii) was 
printed, more light has been thrown upon it by the discovery of 
a large portion of the text in an Ethiopic version. Particulars of 
this will be found in a series of articles by me in the Journal of 
Theological Studies for 1910-11 (vol. xii.). In the new portions 
there are two passages which recall 2 Peter. One is a description 
of the final fire, upon which great stress is laid ; the other relates 
an appearance of Moses and Elias on the Holy Mountain and the 

1 The threefold division is supported, perhaps, by the Didache, 
see p. xxxviii. 


utterance of a voice from Heaven. The relation of this section 
of the Ethiopic to the Greek text described on p. xxvi has yet to 
be determined. The fact that both in 2 Peter and in the Apoca- 
lypse there is mention of a scene on the Holy Mountain, and of 
a voice from Heaven, is noteworthy. 

I may add that I now incline to the view previously enter- 
tained by more than one critic that the Greek fragment is 
really a portion of the Gospel of Peter, which had incorporated, 
with some changes, a large section of the Apocalypse ; the 
latter having been already current for some time as a separate 

The Apocalypse of Baruch. 

Another early writing, I have recently noticed, has some 
notable coincidences of language with 2 Peter. This is the 
Apocalypse of Baruck 1 , a book of considerable length and great 
interest, which exists in a complete form only in a Syriac 
version. It is Jewish, not Christian, in origin, and the latest 
date assigned to it in its present form is 130 A.D. The portion 
of it which contains the coincidences I have referred to is the 
concluding section (chapters Ixxviii. Ixxxvii.), which gives us 
the text of an Epistle addressed by Baruch to the nine and a half 
tribes who had been deported across the Euphrates in the First 

The resemblances I have noted are these : 
Ixxviii. 2. The greeting " Mercy and peace." 

5. Wherefore I have been the more careful to leave 
you the word, of this epistle before I die 
(2 Pet. i. 12, 13). 
7. For if ye so do these things, He will continually 

remember you (2 Pet. i. 10). 

In what follows, especially in Ixxxiii., there are warnings of the 
coming j udgment, and exhortation against worldly thoughts : 
Ixxxiv. 1. Behold, I have therefore made known to you 
these things while I live... and I will set 

i I quote from Dr E. H. Charles's edition of 1896. 


before you some of the commandments of 
His judgment before I die. 

Ixxxv. 8. Again moreover the Most High also is long- 
suffering towards us here (2 Pet. iii. 9). 
9. Before therefore judgment exact its own... let us 

prepare our soul (2 Pet. iii. 11). 

The prophet, like the Apostle, has been warned of his speedy 
departure from this world, and it is possible that the passages 

1 have quoted are only accidentally similar to the phrases in 

2 Peter. But they deserve to be noticed, and further investiga- 
tion may show that there is a real connexion between the two 


Tlerpos Bov\o$ Kal a?rot7ToXo9 'Irjcrov 
T0t9 laori/jLov rjfMV \a^ovcrt,v rcianv ev Bc/caio- 
rov Oeov rj/jicov /cal o-corrjpos 'Irjaov Xpicrrov' 
/cal elprjvrj rr\7]6vv6eL7] ev 7Tiyv(t)cri rov 
Beov /cal 'I^crou rov KVpLov TjfjbSyv, 3 o>9 iravra j]^lv rfj$ 
avrov ra rrpos farjv /cal evaefteLav Be- 
Sia rrjs eWyz^o-eo)? rov Ka\eo-avros r)fj,a<; 
oia 86^779 teal a/?T?}9, 4 5i' oov ra rl/jLia /cat /jueyiara 
67rayy\/Jiara SeStoprjrai,, iva Sia rovrcov <yevr]c 
tcoivcovol <^uo-6o>9, aTrotywyovres rfjs ev rw KOCT/JLO) ev erri- 
6 v iila <f>6opa<S' 5 /cal avro rovro oe O-TTOV&TJV 
Trapeio-eveyicavres eTTL^opTjjija-are ev ry rrlcrrei, v 
rrjv apertfv, ev 8e rfj apery rrjv fyvaxriv, 6 ev Be rfj 
yvcoaei rrjv ey/cpdreiav, ev Be ry eyrcpareia rrjv vrro- 
fjbovrjv, ev Be rfj vTro/jiovfj rrjv evvefteiav, 7 eV Be rfj 
evcre/3eia rrjv ^n\aBe\^)laVy ev Be rrj <^>tXa8eX^)ta rrjv 
dyaTrrjv' s ravra yap vplv V7rdp%ovra /cal 7T\eovdovra 
OVK dpyovs ovBe d/cdpTrovs /caOiarrja-tv a*9 rrjv rov 
fcvpiov rjfjLcov 'I^croO ^ipiarov eTriyvcoaW 9 w yap //,?? 
Trdpeo~rt,v ravra, rf</>Xo9 eartv fjbvwTrd&v, 'X.TjBrjv \a- 
/3o)V rov /caOapicr/bLov r&v rca\ai avrov d/Jbapncov. 
w Bib fJLaXkov, dBe\<f)oi, <77rovBdaare /3e/3aiav V/ACOV rrjv 
/c\rjcriv /cal e/c\oyrjv rroielcdai,' ravra yap Trotovvres 
ov fj,rj Trraiarjre rcore" ll ovra)<; yap rr\ov(rlw<; eVt^o- 
prfyrjOijo'erai, V/JLLV 77 etVoSo9 et9 Trjv alwviov jBaari,\eLav 
rov /cvpiov TjfMtov Ka\ o-wrrjpos 'Irjorov Xpttrrou. 

2 Peter A 

E1TIITOAH [1 12 

12 A to /u-eXXTJo-o) del v^as VTrofjU/jLvrja-Keiv Trepl rov- 
rcov, KaiTrep elSoras /cal earrtjpiy^evov^ ev rfj nrapovcrri 
d\7jOeia. ^Sitcaiov 8e rjyovfjLai, e</>' o<roz> et/u ev roirrq) 
ra> o-tcrjvcofJiari, &t,eyeipet,v u/m? eV VTro/juvtfcrei,, 14 
ort Ta^ivr) ecrrw rj aTrodecn^ rov cr/c^z/coyu-aro? 

/cat o tcvpios TJ/JL&V 'I^o-oO? X/?to-T09 
15 <77rou8a<rft) Se /cat e/cdcrTore e^eiv u/ia? /i-era 


fyicriievois fJLvOois e^a/coXtOvOtjcravTes 
TT\V rov /cvpiov TJ/JLWV 'Irjaov Xpt<rToi) ^vvapiv fcal 
Trapovcriav, aXX' eVoTrrat yevTjBevre^ rrj? e/ceivov /jieya- 
Xetor?/TO9. 17 Xa/3a)v ^ap irapd Oeov Trarpbs rijvfa teal 
&6j;av 00)^9 eve^Oelo-r}^ avrq) roidaSe VTTO r^9 ^eja- 
Xo7T/3e7ro09 80^779 'O ft09 A'-ou 6 dycnrrjTos JJLOV ovro? 
ecrriv, et9 ov 670) evboKqa-a, u /cal ravr^v TTJV (frcovrjv 
r)/jbel<; rjKova-afjLev e'f ovpavov eve^jdeltrav <rvv auroS 6Vr69 
ei/ TO) 0-76 o/?e^. 19 /cal e^ofiev /3e/3at6repov rov 
riicov \6<yov, c5 A:aXw9 Trotetre 7rpocre^oi/T69 W9 
(baivovn ev av'XjjL'ripa) TOTTO), a>9 ou rj/jiepa 
Kal <a>o-<o/309 dvaretty ev raw tcapftiais V/AWV 20 rovro 
irp&rov yiva)(TKOvrs on Trdcra irpo^reLa ypa^>rj^ ISia? 
ov yiverai,, 21 ou yap Oe\ij^ari> dvBpct)7rov 
irpo^rjreLa Trore, aXXa vrro 7rvev/Jt,aros dyiov 
<j>ep6(jivoi e\d\7j(rav diro Beov avOpcDTrot. 

2 l '}yevovro Se Kal tyevSoTTpoffrfjrai ev ru> XacS, &)9 
/col ev v/jilv ecrovrai < ^ev8o^tSao-/caXot, olnves rrapeio-d- 
%ovo~iv alpeorei, 1 ? a7ra)Xefa9, fcal rov dyopdcravra avrovs 
^ea-Trorrjv dpvovfjbevoi, eirdyovres eavrols ra%ivr}V aVco- 
XetaV z tcai TroXXot e^a/co\ov6rjo-ov(TLv avrwv rat9 do~e\- 
yeiais, Ai' oyc 17 0809x779 d^Oeias BAAC(})HMH0HC6TAi* 3 /cat 

/j,7ropev<rovra,i' ols 

2 1 6] FTETPOY B 

TO Kpi/jia 6K7ra\at OVK dpyel, fcal 
vvard^ei. 4 et yap 6 Oeos dyye\cov d/jLaprfjo-avrcov OVK 
, aXXa aeipols %6<j)ov raprapwo-as 

et9 Kpiaw rrjpov/Aevovs, 5 Kal dp^aiov Koarpov OVK 

(raro, d\\d oy&oov Nwe BiKaioavvr}^ KrjpVKa (f)v\a!;ev , 

/ji\\6vra)v daeffeaiv reOeiKcbs, 7 Kal 'oiKaiov AGOT Kara- 
TTOvov^evov VTTO T^? T&v dOecr/jLCDV ev d<T\y6ia dva- 
(TTpO(f>7J<$ epvo-aro, 8 /3Xe/Li//.aTt ydp KOI aKofj 
ev avrols r]^epav ef ^/ 

pvecrdai,, aSt/cou? 8e t? r)fj,epav 
Ko\ao/jbevovs rrjpeiv, 10 fjL,d\i(rra Be TOVS OTTLO-O) crapKO? 
ev eiriOv^La /JLICKT/JLOV Tropevo/Aevovs Kal KVpiorrjTos Kara- 
i, avdaoeis, Sofa? ov rpepovcnv, 

dyye\oi lo'^vi Kal S 
foz/69 6We9 ov (ftepovcriv Kar avrcov \jjrapa 

roi Se, a>9 a\oya %<pa yeyev- 
a\a)criv Kal (f)@opdv, ev 0^9 dyvoov&iv 
/3\ao-<f>r)/jLovvT<;, ev ry (frOopa avrcov Kal <$>6apY)<TovTai, 
lB dS(,KOv/juevoi, /jM&Obv dBiKias' rjSovrjv rjyovfjLevoi rrjv 
ev rji^epa rpv(j>tjv, (77ri\oi Kal /JLCO/JLOI evrpvfytovres ev 
dirdra^ avr&v avvevco^ov pevot, vfilv, U 6<j)0a\- 

7r\eovej;ias e^ovreS) Kara pas reKva, 
15 Kara\ei7rovres evdelav 6B6v e7r\avi^drjo'av, e^aKoXov- 
0ij<TavT$ rfj 6BaJ rov BaXaa/x rov J$ea)p 09 fjLia-Qbv 
r)ydirr)(rev lQ e\ey^iv Be ea^ev lotas 
ov a<f>a)vov ev dv0pa>7rov (jxavfj 


EfTIITOAH [2 16 

K(t>\vcrv rrjv TOT) 7rpo<j)r)Tov 7rapa<j)povLav. I7 ovroi 
irrjyal avvSpoi teal ofii^Xai, VTTO XatXa7TO9 e'Xau- 
i, ot9 o f 0(^09 roO cr/corof? rerrfprjrai,. 18 v7repoyKa 
jap jjLaraiorriros ^>6eyy6fjLevoL e\edovaiv ev eTriOv/jiiais 
a<7eX'yetat9 roi)9 0X170)9 dTrofavyovras rovs ev 

\6fjbevoi,, avrol Bov\oi, vTrdp^ovres rrjs (frOopas' c5 ydp 
r*9 ^Trrjrai, rovry SeBov\a)TaL 20 et yap aTrocfrvyovTes 
rd fJLidcr fjbara rov /c6<r/jiov ev iTTiyvaxrei TOV /cvpiov KOI 
cra)T7}/oo9 'I^crou Xpiarov TOVTOIS be Trdkiv e'/-i7rXa/eez>T69 
rjTTOovrai,, yeyovev avrol? rd eV^ara ^eipova rwv 7rpa>- 
TCOV. 2l /cp6LTTOv ydp r)V avToi? /i^ 7reyva)KvaL rrjv 
6Sbv rijs Sitcaiocrvwrj*; fj eTriyvovcnv VTroarpe^lrat, e/c 
T?;9 TrapaSoOelo'Tj^ aurols dylas evro\fjs' 22 o-v{j,/3e/3r)Kev 
avTols TO rr)9 akfjOovs Trapoifjblas KycoN enicrpevpAC eni 
TO TAION elepAMA, Kai *T9 \ovo-afjuevrj et9 KV\LO-/J,OV ftop- 

3 lr Tavrr)v 17^7;, dyaTrrjroi, Sevrepav vfilv ypdcjxo 
7na-To\r}V, ev a?9 Sieyelpa* V/AWV ev vTro/jLvij&ei rrjv 
el\iKpivrj Sidvotav, 2 /Jivr)(r0fjvai, TW 
TWV VTTO TGOV dyi(ov 7rpo<f>r)T(v Kai T7)9 TU>V 

ez>ToX?79 rov Kvpiov Kai crcorrjpos, 3 ToOro irp&rov 

OTI eXevaovrat, enr ecr^drwv roov fj 
ev efiTraiy/jLOvfj e^Trai/crai Kara ra9 iSias e 
avrwv TTOpevofjuevot 4 Kai \eyovT6<$ Tlov ecrrlv 77 eTray- 
ye\ia rrjs Trapovcrlas avrov ; d<j) 179 yap ol Trarepes 
eKOifJurjO^a-av, irdvra ovrax; Siapevei dnr a/3%^9 KTicrea><$. 
5 \avOdvL yap avrovs rovro 9e\ovra^ OTI ovpavol tfvav 
K7ra\at, KOI yfj ef uSaro9 KOI Si /Saro9 crvvecrrwaa 
TO) rov Oeov \6y<o, Q Bi oov 6 rore KOG-JJLO^ vSan Kara- 
K\v<r6el<; aTrcoXero* 7 ot Se vvv ovpavol Kai rj yrj TOO avra> 

3 i8] TTETPOY B 5 

\6yqy TeOrjo-avpicr^evoL elcrlv irvpl TTjpov/jbevot, et9 
KpL&ews /cal a7Tft>Xeta? TWV acre ft wv dvOpooTrcov. 
8e TOVTO fir) \av0aveTO) VfJLas, dyaTrvjTOL, ori /j,ia rjfjLe 
nAp<\ Kypico &>9 ^i\La errj fcal XI'AIA ITH o>c HMe 
9 ov ffpaSvvet, K.vpio<i TT)? eTrayyeXias, &>? rtz/e? /3pa$vrfJTa 
rjyovvrai,, d\\a fiafcpoOvpei et? t//ia?, pr] 
Tti^a? d7ro\eadai d\\d iravras et? /juerdvotav 
f/ Hfet Se Tj^juepa Kvpiov a$9 tc\7TTr)s, ev f) ol ovpavol 
Trape\evcrovrai, crroi^ela Se Kavcrov/jLva \v- 
, KCLI 77} KOI ra ev avrfj epya evpe6r]crerai,. 
ll TovTO)v OVTCO? TrdvT&v \vofiivwv TToraTTou? Set vTrdp- 
%eiv [uyLta?] eV a^iai^ avacrTpofyals KOI evcrefteiais, 
l2 7rpocrBoKC0VTas /cal cnrevSovTas rrjv irapovcriav T?}? 
TOV 6eov rjfjiepaSy &i yv oypANOi ir 
KOI aroi^ela KavcrovfLwa TH'KTAI' IS KAINOYC Be oy 
KA) THN KAINHN Kara TO 67rdy<ye\/j,a avTov TrpocrSo/cco/jiev, 
ev ot9 SiKCiiocrvvr) Karoiicel. 
ravra TrpocrSoKtoVTes aTrovSacrare aairiKoL KOI 

avrcp evpeOrfvat, ev elpr^vr], l5 /cal rrjv TOV KVplov 
fiaKpodvfjiLav a-(orr)piav ^yelaOe, /ca0a)<? /cal o dya- 
7T?;T09 rjfjicov aSeX</>o9 TlavXo? Kara rrjv SoOelcrav avrm 
cro<f)iav eypatyev vfuv, 16 &)9 /cal ev 7rd<7ai<; eVi<rToXat9 
\a\wv ev avrals Trepl TOVTCOV, ev at9 earlv Sv<7v6r)Td 
nva, a ol dfiaOels /cal do-rrfpiKToi crrpeftKovcriv 009 /cal 
pa^>a9 7r/oo9 TTJV IStav avr&v aTrcaiXeiav. 
ovv, dyaTrrjroi, TrpoyivtoCT/covTes <f)V\dao-eo-0e 
wa fJLrj rfj rS)V dOecr/jLcov TrXdvrj avvaTra'^OevTe^ e/CTre- 
o-rjre TOV i&iov crTTjpiy/jiov, 18 avj;dv6Te Se ev yjapiTi* teal 
yvcocret TOV /cvpiov fjfjL&v /cal o-coTrjpos 'Irjcrov 
aura) T] Sofa /cal vvv teal et9 rj^epav al 


09 Be ' 

rot? e 6ft> Trarp r)yaTrr)fjLevoi<s ica 

K\r]Tois' 2 eA,eo9 u/ui/ teal elprjvrj KOI dyaTrrj 

i, Tracrav aTrovSrjv iroLovfj,evo^ 
Trepl rr}? KOivij? rj/jiwv a-wrriplas avajKifV 

V/JLIV 7rapaKa\(t)v 7raycovi^(T0aL rfj 

rot? ay lots Triarei. *7rap6i<76$vr)(Tav yap 
avOpcoTTOi, ol TToXau Trpoyeypa/jL/jievoi, et? rovro TO 
, acre/3et9, rrjv rov Beov rj^wv yapiTa ^eTanOevre^ 
et? do-e\yiav KOI rbv /JLOVOV SecrTrorrjv teal Kvpiov TJ/JLCOV 
*\r)aovv yipta-rov apvov/JievoL ^Ttrofjuvrjcrai, Be upas 

j3ov\o/j,ai) et^ora? a?raf Trdvra, OTL Kupto? \aov IK 7779 
A.lyv7TTOv acocra? TO Sevrepov TOU9 W TTKTTeva-avTas 
, 6 dyye\ovs re TOU9 A 1 ^ TijprjcravTas rrjv eav- 
dp%f)V d\\a aTToXtTTO^Ta? TO L^LOV oltcrjTrjpiov et9 
tcpicnv fji,eyd\.r)s r)/j,epas Sea-yLtot? at'Stot? WTTO fo<oz/ T6T7;- 
prjtcev' 7 a>9 ^oBofia /cat ~T6/j,oppa /cal at irepi avras 
7roXet9, TOZ/ O/AOIOV TpoTrov TovTot9 e/cTropvevo-aaai /cal 
a7re\6ov(rai, OTTLCTO) aapKO^ erepas, TrpofceivraL Sely/ia 
alcoviov BLKTJV vire^ova-ai. 8 'O/,to/a)9 


teal ovTot, evv7rvia6/j,6voi, a-dpKa fiev fjualvovo-w, tcvpio- 
T7]Ta Be dOerovcriv, 8o<x9 Be /3\ao-(f)r)fAova-i,v. d 'O Be 
Mix^dA o ApXAfreAoc, ore TG> Bt,aft6\(p Bia/cpivopevo? 
Bie\eyeTo irepl TOV Ma>u<reft>9 o-oo/naros, OVK GTci 
Kpi<TLv eireve^Kelv /3A,ao-(?7/ua<?, a\\a elirev ' 
coi Kypioc. 10 Ovrot Be ova /J,ev OVK oiSa<rt,v 
/Aovcriv, ocra Be <^)ucrt/cc59 to? ra d\oja c3 
ev Touroi? <j)6eipovraL ll oval avrot?, ort T^ 080) rot) 
ty eTTOpevOiya-av, Kal Ty irKdvg TOV BaXaa/t 

aVy Kal rfi avriko^la rov Ko/oe aTrew 
I2 ovroi elcriv ol ev rat? a^dirai^ vjj,d)V ar7ri\dBe<; crvv- 

avvBpoi VTTO dve/jicov Trapafapo/Jievat,, BevBpa 
pLva a/cap7ra 8t? diroOavovra eKpt^coOevra, 
aypia Oa\dao-r)<; e7ra<f)piovTa ra? eavrwv 

t9 ^0^)0? TOl) CT^OTOl>9 Ci? 

u '^7Tpo(f)'^Tevo~ev Be KOI TOVTOLS 
yu-09 a?ro 'ASa/i, f Ei/cw% \eycov 'IBov HA0N Kypioc 

MypiAciN AYTOY, 15 7rofc7)<jai KpLo~iv Kara iravrcov 

Ka eeyai> Trvras rou9 a<T6yet9 Tre/ot Trvrcov 
epycov da-eftelas avrwv wv rjo-eftrjo-av Kal Trepl 

ov wv e\d\r)o~av Kar avrov daaprco\ol do~e- 
16 Ovroi elcrtv joyyvaraL, /xe p^ifjio tpoi, Kara 

ra9 eTTidv^la^ avTUtv iropevo^evoiy Kal TO aro/jia avr&v 

17C T/Ltet9 Se, dyaTrrjToi, fAinftotfrjTe TWV prj/judrcov 
Trpoeiprj/juevcov VTTO TU>V aTroo-ToX&v TOV Kvpiov rj 
'lyo-ov Xptcj-Tou* 18 ort e\eyov VJMV 'ETT' ea^drov 
vov ecrovTai, e/jLTraiKrai Kara ra9 eavTwv e 
TTopevo/jievot, T&v dcrefteiwv. lQ Ovro[ elffiv ol a 

t9 Be, 


t,, 7roi,KO$ofJiovvT<; eavrovs TTJ dyLCordrrj VJJLGOV 
, eV irvevpaTi dji(p irpoa-ev^o^evoiy 2l avrov<i ev 
Oeov TV) pr) (rare TrpocrSe^o/ie^ot TO eXeo? roi) 
Kvpiov r)fj,(0v 'Itja-ov XptcrToO et? farjv alwviov. 22 Kat 
01)9 yu,ez/ eXeare SiaKpivopevovs crw^ere CK nypo x c ApnA- 
zoisiTec, 23 oi)9 Se e'Xeare eV <t>6j3(p, yLtto-ourre? /cat TOV a?ro 
T?)? crap/cos ecniAooMeNON XITOONA. 

24 Tc3 8e 8vva/jLev(0 (fruXdgcu vfias airraldTOV^ KOI 
arrjcrai /caTevcoTriov TT)<S 86j;r)s avrov a/itw/^ou? eV dya\- 
Xtacret 25 //,oyoo ^eoS crcoTTjpL rj/juwv Sid 'Ivjaov XpHrrov 
rov /cvpiov rf/juwv Bo^a /j,ja\cocrvvrj /cpdro? teal e^ovcria 
Trpo TTCLVTOS rov alwvos Kal vvv real et9 Trdvra? 


I. 1. SIJJLCOV. This is the reading of the Vatican MS. B, of many 
cursive MSS. and of the Versions : but an important group including the 
uncials KAKLP reads Simeon'. This latter form occurs in but one 
other passage in N.T., Acts xv. 14, where James the brother of the 
Lord says " Symeon hath declared unto us," etc. It is the Hebrew 
form of the name, while Sfytw*' would pass muster among Greeks and 
Latins: Simo, derived from <rifj,6s simus (snub-nosed), occurs as a 
slave-name in the plays of Plautus and Terence. 

Simon, then, is the commoner form of the name, and, if it were the 
original reading here, one cannot see why Symeon should have been 
substituted for it. Westcott and Hort, in deference to the Vatican 
MS., give Simon a place in the text: but, with Mayor and Bigg, 
I venture to prefer Symeon. Its presence here is one of the few 
features which make for the genuineness of the Epistle. It does not 
occur in the spurious Petrine writings, and may be a true reminiscence 
of a habit of the Apostle. 

SovXos Kai diroo-ToXos. SouXos stands alone in Jude and James. 
a7r6<rroXos alone in 1 Pet. : dov\. and air. together in Rom. Tit. 


o-WTTjpos 'Itjo-ov Xpierrov. 

No local Church is named. 

Xaxovo-iv implies that faith is the gift of God (cf. Ko. xii. 3, 1 Co. 
xii. 9), not due to human merit. The author of the Wisdom of Solomon 
speaks of Solomon as having been allotted a good soul (viii. 19 fax^s 
ZXaxov ay adiis) ' not an " orthodox " thought. 

l<r6Ti(j.ov i^iuv. " Conveying the same privileges to you as it does to 
us (the Apostles)." The word has a civic sense : cf. a passage quoted 
by Field (and others) from Josephus (Antiquities xii. 3. 1) kv avrfj rij 
fJi-rirpOTT^Xei 'Avrioxei-q- TroXtretas ai^Tous ?7$w<re Ka.1 TOIS tvoiKiadeiffLV 
l<rorlfj.ovs ct7r^5eie Ma/ce56<7t nal "EXXTjai. Cf. Tit. i. 4 KOLVTJV irlvnv. 

io // PETER [1 1 

kv 8iK<uo<rvvT). Best taken with t<r6Ttfjwv. The equality is due to 
the justice of God, who makes no distinction between the Apostles 
and the rank and file of the Church. 

TOV 0ov Tjp,o>v Kal <rcoTTJpos 'I. X. Are both God the Father and 
God the Son spoken of here, or is the Son alone intended? Probably 
the latter: for note that the two substantives 6eos and awf\a have but 
the one article: and that in three other places in this Epistle we 
have the phrase TOO Kvptov TUJI.&V Kal (ruTrjpos'I. X., viz. i. 11, ii. 20, 
iii. 18: also in iii. 2 TOV Kvptov K. (rurrjpos : in all of which the 
Kvpios and <rwrip must apply to one person. It would thus be in 
accordance with our author's habit to join the 0e6s and o-ur^p here. 

On the other hand, in v. 2, if we accept the reading of most 
authorities we have a distinction made between the Father and the 
Son, in the words TOV deov /cai'I^crou TOV KvpLov ri/j-wv. And the direct 
connexion of 0eos with 'lycrovs XpiaTos has no certain parallel in N.T. 

Yet, in the second century, Ignatius, in the preface to his letter to 
the Ephesians speaks of Jesus Christ as 6 debs rj/^Cov : and his date is 
near that which we assign to 2 Peter. 

2. \dpis fy tv Kc ^ ' l P*ivT] TT\T\QvvQfCi]. Identical with the saluta- 
tion in 1 Pet. i. 2. xdpts and dp-qvf) without the verb are the rule in 
the Pauline salutations. See on Jude 1. Jude has the verb but 
differs in the substantives. 

e'v ciri-yvcocrEi. For a very full treatment of this word see Dean 
Kobinson's excursus in his Comm. on Ephesians. 

Grace and peace will be increased as the knowledge of God grows. 

TOV 0ov K. J lT]<rov TOU KvpCov T]|jLa)v. This is the reading of most 
MSS. : but the uncial P, some important Latin MSS., and some good 
cursives omit TOV deov Kal 'lyo-ov, giving merely TOV Kvptov TJ/J.&V or 

T. K. 77/-C. 'I. X. 

There is some reason for preferring the shorter form, since the 
phrase is one which was much more likely to be expanded than 
abbreviated : but the weight of authority is difficult to resist. It is a 
very odd feature that the Sahidic version leaves out the whole verse. 

3. ws. It is a question whether we ought to place a comma or a 
full stop immediately before this word. If a comma, then we must 
take this sentence with the preceding one and translate, ' ' May 
grace and peace be multiplied, etc. ...(as it surely will) seeing that 
His divine power has given, etc." and come to a full stop at the 
end of v. 4. If a full stop, we must render thus, " Seeing that His 
divine power has given, etc you must give all diligence, etc." 
The next full stop will then be at the end of v. 5. It is, however, 
awkward in this case to give a proper sense to the words Kal euro TOVTO 

15] NOTES ii 

de in v. 5. They are better suited to the beginning of a Greek sentence. 
I think the comma is to be preferred. 

This is a case in which the early MSS., devoid of punctuation, do 
not help us. 

Oefo, Svvajus does not occur elsewhere in N.T., but is very common 
in philosophical writings. It is also found (along with several other 
coincidences of language with 2 Peter) in an inscription of Stratonicea 
in Caria, mentioned in the Introduction (p. xxv, note). 

The divine power has supplied us with all that is needed for life 
and godliness (0*77 is probably life in this world, not in the next) 
by means of the knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory 
and excellence. Probably us means the Apostles. Christ called them 
to Him by showing them His glory (as at the Transfiguration), and 
His apery, His inner perfection, in His life and teaching. Thus, if 
the readers of the Epistle come to know Him, they will be in a 
position to live soberly and godly in this present world. 

8i<i 86|-r]s K. dpTTJs. So BKL and a few other authorities : KACP 
and most versions read idiq. 56ri K. apery. A majority of editors 
(including the most recent) prefer the latter reading. 

aperi] is rare in N.T. It only occurs in 1 Pet. ii. 9 OTTWS rds operas 
^ayyeL\ijre rod K 0-/c6rous uyuas KaXeVapros, where it may be rendered 
by "mighty works" or "praises": in Phil. iv. 8 et TIS apery Kal 
ft ris twaivos, ravra \oylfc(r6e : and in verse 5 of this chapter. 

4. 81 wv has been taken in three ways : (1) of " us " the Apostles, 
(2) of rd TT/JOS faty Kal e&r^Setav, (3) of oa Kal apery. This last seems 
by far the best : Christ calls us by His excellence and gives us 
(dedupyrai is active) the promises, which help us to attain likeness 
to Him. 

\tvnor0e 0euxs KCHVWVOI 4>v<rs- Though the author here uses a 
phrase more characteristic of Greek philosophy than of the Bible, 
his meaning is really that of John i. 12 ISw/cej/ avrois e&vcrLav reKva. 
6eov yeveadaL. For the phrase compare Plato, Protagoras 322 A 6 
avQpwiros deLas p.ereax e noipas. The condition necessary to this par- 
taking of God's nature is expressed in the next sentence, dirocpvyovres, 
etc. The corruption consists in lust, and is in " the world." St James 
(i. 21) and St John (1 Jo. i. 16) speak to the same effect. 

5. Kai avro TOVTO 8 The two passages usually quoted to exemplify 
the use of avrb rovro are (1) Xenophon, Anab. i. 9. 21 Kal yap avrb 
rovro oinrep avrds ^e/ca (pLXuv ifiero 5et<r0cu, ws (rvvepyovs ex ot > Ka ' o-vros 
tTreiparo avvepybs rots 0\ois Kpdriffros dvat, (2) Plato, Protag. 310 E 
aura ravra Kal vvv TIKW irapd ae. In both these passages, as in our 
text, the phrase means "for this very reason." God has put within 

12 // PETER [1 5 

your reach the means of participating in His nature : this fact ought 
to incite you to exertion on your Bide. 

irapur6vyKavTS. This compound usually has the force of 
"smuggling in, bringing in by stealth": but it does not seem 
practicable to give it such a meaning here. d<r<f>tpea6ou ffirov8r]i> 
without the irapd is, as Mayor shows by a number of examples, a 
common phrase in later Greek. 

iri)(opT]Y'n<raTe. The best English equivalent here is perhaps 
" provide." The virtues enumerated immediately afterwards are to 
be the contribution of man to meet what God gives. We have the 
verb again in i. 11, and three times in the Pauline Epistles (2 Cor. 
ix. 10 d eirixopriyuv <nr{p/Ji,a rf (nrelpovri... Gal. iii. 5 6 
vfuv rb TTvevfia. Col. ii. 19 TTO.V TO crw^ia 5ia r&v 

*v. The force of the preposition is not clear. It may import that 
each of the virtues named is to be infused or grafted into that which 
precedes. But the order in which the virtues are set out does not seem 
to bear very strict investigation. The base on which all is founded is 
belief in Christ, and the culmination is love to God and man. The 
intermediate steps, we feel, might admit of variation or addition. 

Eight in all are named : after irfcms comes apery. We may take this 
in the general sense of virtue (our list seems to put some words of 
larger import at the beginning) or give it a more special meaning of 
strength and bravery in the domain of morals. The former is pre- 

6. -yvcSo-is. Mayor well compares Job., vii. 17 iav ns dtXy rb 
dt\-r)fj,a avrov Troifiv, yvufferai irepi rrjs dtdax^- Only, here, the 
knowledge that will come of aperf is not only knowledge about God, 
but knowledge of Him and of His will. 

Control over self in all matters. 

On this St James lays great stress (i. 3, 4 and 12), and so 
does St John in the Apocalypse (e.g. i. 9, ii. 2, 3, 19, etc.). We may 
think of it as meaning to the early Christians two things in particular 
endurance under persecution, and patient waiting for the Eeturn of 
the Lord. Perhaps the latter meaning was the one more present to the 
writer's mind : he speaks at length about it in the third chapter. 

evo-c'pcia, like aperf, is so general a word that it is puzzling. We 
have it in 1 Tim. vi. 11, along with other words of this list: diuKe 5e 
diKa.LOffiJV'tjv , evfftjBeiav, Trlffriv, dydirrjv, VITO/JLOV/IV, trpavTradiav. Our 
author has used it in verse 3, and we shall not be far wrong if we 
render it in both places as "godly conduct." 

7. <f>iXaSeX4>a. It is interesting to see how this word has been 

1 10] NOTES 13 

transformed in meaning under Christian (and Jewish) influences. 
To the Greek proper it meant only the affection of a brother for his 
own actual brother. In a Jewish book (2 Maccabees xv. 14) we find 
the prophet Jeremiah called 0iXd5eX0os, because he "prays much for 
the people." Thus to the Jew, all the nation were beginning to be 
thought of as brethren. In the N.T. no expression is more familiar 
to us than "the brethren" applied to those who are united in a 
common belief. We are reminded of 0iXa5eX0/a and dyd-n-rj by the 
passage 1 John iv. 20 t&v ris ei-irq 'Ayatru TOV 0e6v, xal TOV aof\(pbv 
avrov AUCTT;, \f/eij(TTT)s t<rrlv. 

With this list of virtues may be compared (besides 1 Tim. already 
quoted) Gal. v. 22. In the Shepherd of Hermas, written early in the 
second century, is a genealogical tree of virtues which somewhat 
resembles ours : Hums, 'EyKpdreia, 'ATrXd-njs, 'A^a/cta, Se/ii/or^s, 'E?ri- 

8. If these qualities be in you and increase (the idea of growth is 
in tr\eovaovTa.} they will indeed prevent you from being either 
inactive or unfruitful in what relates to (or in gaining) the knowledge 
of our Lord. The words OVK dpyotis otidt aKapirovs are quoted in the 
Letter of the Churches of Vienne and Lyons (see p. xviii). 

9. On the other hand their absence makes a man spiritually blind, 
or at least short-sighted. 

(the more natural form of the word would have been 
, cf. fjivuirla) means screwing up the eyes in order to see, as 
a short-sighted man does. It limits the word ru0X6s, and does not 
emphasize it. 

\r^Qi\v Xap<Jv, etc. He forgets the cleansing of his former sins, 
which took place when he was baptized. A phrase in Heb. i. 3 
combines two of the words used here " 8t' eaurou Kadaptfffjidv iroii]<rdf^evo3 
TUV d/MpTiuv ^/xwv." Among other passages quoted by Mayor, one 
from 1 Cor. vi. 11 is specially apt: Kal ravrd rives TJTC aXXA direXoto-affde, 
d\\a -riyidve-rrre. The man's forgetfulness of the cleansing he received 
in baptism paralyses his efforts to put away evil habits. 

10. 810 jidXXov. With this blessing and this curse in view, you 
should be the more eager to do your part the part which God allows, 
and indeed requires from you in making effective the call which has 
come to you from Him. As Christians you are called and chosen : 
but that fact does not render exertion on your part unnecessary. You 
must walk worthily of the calling wherewith you were called (Eph. iv. 1) 
(where however /cX^<ris is not parallel to KaXecravros of v. 3 here). 

Tavra refers back to the list of virtues. 

ov |xr irTcUoTjT^ irore. St James (iii. 2) says TroXXd yap 

14 // PETER [1 10 

s. Our author does not mean that his readers will be sinless : he 
is thinking of such final stumbling as the Psalmist speaks of, " my feet 
were almost gone, my treadings had well-nigh slipped." Your pro- 
gress will be continuous, he says, and your entrance into the (future) 
kingdom of glory triumphant. Compare the words of Aristides quoted 
on p. xviii. 

11. eto-oSos would most naturally mean the place of entrance, but 
here, as in Heb. x. 19 and elsewhere in N.T., it clearly means the 
action of entering. 

12. Aio. Seeing the great issues which hang upon all this. 
p.eX\TJ<ra> del virofjii|xvii<rKiv. "I shall be about to remind you 

always" is undoubtedly a very awkward phrase. The B.V. gives 
" I shall be ready always to put you in remembrance," but from the 
context one would judge that the writer is speaking of something 
which he means to do forthwith. The only parallel in N.T. is 
Matt. xxiv. 6 ^eXX^o-ere aKotieu' ?roX^oi;s...d/)are, JJLT) 6poei<r6e, where 
the sense seems to be "you must be prepared to hear of wars." 
The difficulty was felt by some authorities (the late uncials KL 
and the late Syriac versions) which give OVK ctyueX^o-w (adopted by 
the A.V. "I will not be negligent"): two Latin authorities have 
the equivalent of of> ^eXXTyo-w. There is no old authority for the 
reading which really seems preferable, namely pcMjeu, suggested by 
Dr Field of Norwich : but it is possible that the Greek lexicographer 
Suidas (or his source) had this passage in mind when he wrote 
fj,e\r)<rw, a-rrovddffu, (ppovrlffu. Two other lexicographers, Hesychius and 
Photius, give the same interpretation of yueXX^o-w, which is undoubtedly 
a mistake, whether of their own, or of the scribes who copied out their 

In other places of the N.T. where e/*eXej> or /*& occur (Jo. xii. 6, 
1 P. v. 7, Matt. xxii. 16), many MSS. write encXXev, /iAX. 

eorTT]piY|Jkvous v Tfl irapouo-rj dX-r|0tq.. irapotiffr] is not easy to 
interpret satisfactorily. We may render " the truth which has come 
to you" as in Col. i. 5, 6 TOV etayyeXiov TOV irapdvros els v,uas: but 
e/s vitas is needed: or "the truth which is within your reach," 
of. Deut. ' ' The word is very nigh unto thee." An interesting suggestion 
is that of Spitta, which would emend the word to irapadodelcT-y, com- 
paring Jude 3 Ty dVal Trapadodeiaj; rots 07/01$ irtffTei. 

13. 14. It is the more necessary for me to remind you, since I 
shall not be long with you. 

cv is here used of the instrument. 

TO.XIVTJ, speedy : we may take it to mean that the change is to come 
soon, and also that it will be sudden and violent when it comes: 

1 15] NOTES 15 

certainly the former. 6 /ccupos TTJS dva\ijffe6s fj.ov tfytartiKev says St Paul 
at a similar time, 2 Tim. iv. 6. 

dir60<ris TOV <TKT)vw|i.aTos. In N.T. the metaphor is employed in 

2 Cor. v. 2 4. The word occurs 1 Pet. iii. 21 <rapi<bs dir66e<ns ptiirov. 
The verb is common, e.g. airtdevro rb 1/j.dTia, Acts vii. 58. 

KaOcos Kai 6 Kvpios TJp.wv 'I. X. eSTJX&Krcv (ioi. We have of course 
an account of one occasion on which our Lord spoke of St Peter's 
death, and predicted that it would be a violent one (possibly even by 
crucifixion) in Joh. xxi. 18, 19. It has been usual to interpret our 
passage as referring to that. On the other hand, it is urged that the 
point of the prophecy in John is the violent death, while here the 
writer seems to say that he has been told that he is to die shortly. 
There is a famous and ancient legend that St Peter fleeing from the 
Neronian persecution at the instance of the brethren met our Lord 
just outside the gates of Rome, and asked whither He was going 
(Domine, quo vadis?). "I am about to be crucified again " (avwdev 
/uAXw o-To.vpud'fjva.i in the oldest form of the story) was the reply : 
and Peter turned back and fulfilled his destiny. The Lord's words 
here have been variously interpreted, (a) Since you flee I am come 
to be crucified in your stead ; (6) more probably : It is ordained that 
you are to be crucified, and I suffer in the person of all my disciples 
who suffer; (c) the word avwdev is not impossibly the origin of the 
story that Peter was crucified head downwards. 

Possibly this legend may have been in the mind of the writer of 
2 Peter. 

15. o-irovSeurw 8 Kai K<x<rTOT..."I will take measures (besides 
reminding you while I am alive) that you shall have the means of 
reminding yourselves of these truths whenever you please, after my 
death." In other words, "I will leave my teaching with you in 
a permanently accessible form" in some written work which the 
writer means to provide. What work is meant? Not the Epistle; 
the future ffirov8d<r(i) excludes that ; and, besides, the context shows 
that the promised work was to be one which would strengthen the 
reader's belief in the truth of Christianity : it would contain some 
narrative of facts (see v. 16). 

It has been strongly urged that the Gospel of Mark is here meant. 
The probably true tradition of its origin, which goes back to a personal 
disciple of the Lord, John the Presbyter, represents Mark as dependent 
upon Peter for his information, and Clement of Alexandria adds that 
Peter's hearers at Eome begged Mark to put the substance of the 
Apostle's discourses into writing, and that the record was subsequently 
confirmed and authorized by Peter. This relation between Peter and 
Mark would justify the expressions in our text. 

1 6 // PETER [1 15 

There are other possibilities. If 2 Peter is not the work of the 
Apostle the reference to St Mark's Gospel is as likely as ever : but we 
can also conceive that another pseudo-Petrine work is meant, e.g. the 
Preaching of Peter (see Introd.) which may very well have contained 
both religious instruction, and also some narrative portions : or, just 
possibly, the Apocalypse of Peter t which contained teaching about the 
irapov<rta of Christ (see v. 16). 

1618. Remember that we Apostles had ocular evidence for the 
truth of what we preach to you, for instance at the Transfiguration, 
when we saw the glory and heard the voice. 

jxvOois laKoXo\9^<ravTS is one of the phrases common to this 
Epistle and to Josephus' Preface to the Antiquities of the Jews, 3, 
oi #XXot vofji.o6^TO.L rols fjitiBoi 
fMdruv e/s robs deovs rijv a.i<f%u v 'n v 

o-eoro({>i<r|Acvois. Not common in the passive. I think Christian 
belief is here contrasted with heathen. 

8vvap.iv Kal irapov<rCav. The power and (second) coming of the 
Lord, cf. Matt. xxiv. 30 Jjp%4pMPir...0Mf& dwd/j-eus Kal 56?7s TroXX^s. 

The Transfiguration, immediately afterwards described, was an 
anticipation of the glory of the second coming. 

eiroirrai has here practically the same sense as ai^Trrcu in Luc. i. 2. 
It is an interesting word, being that used for those who were admitted 
to the final stages of initiation at Eleusis. For the verb see 1 P. ii. 12, 
iii. 2. 

17. Xo,pv -yap.... There is an anacoluthon here: \a/3uv has no 
verb. It is probable that the writer had intended to complete the 
sentence by writing tpefiatuaev rbv irpoQtiTLKov \6yov (in v. 19) for 
v. 18 is a parenthesis. 

viro. Mayor would read cbrd, for which the only authorities are 
the Syriac versions and the Latin Vulgate (delapsa a). peyo-Xoirpeirovs 
SofJTjs, a reverential paraphrase, as Dr Bigg calls it, for God. Similar 
phrases are found in Jewish apocryphal books, e.g. Enoch xiv. 18, 20, 
a lofty throne... and the Great Glory (^ 56a 17 ^eyd\rj) sat thereon. 
In the Testament of Levi (in the book called the Testaments of the 
Twelve Patriarchs) i) fj.eyd\rf 5o|a abides in the highest heaven of all. 
Also in the Epistle of Clement of Eome (ix. 2) Let us look steadfastly 
at those who perfectly served rrj /AeyaXoTrpe-rret 86%-ij ai/roD. 

'0 vlds (Aou 6 d-ya-rr-qTos pov ovros ecrriv, els ov y<o evSoiojara. The 
words are reported thus in the Gospels : 

Matt. xvii. 5 oDros kanv 6 utos /xou 6 dyaTryros, tv $ etidoicrjcra. 

dKotiere aflroO. 

Mark ix. 7 OVTOS tarw 6 vlos /xou 6 dyair., dKovere atirov. 
Luc. ix. 35 oCros <TTIV 6 vios ftov 6 ^/cXeXey/A^j'oy, avrov a/cohere. 

1 19] NOTES 17 

Compare the words at the Baptism : 

Matt. iii. 17 euro's t<TTiv 6 vios fiov 6 fryaTrijTos, iv y euo^/cty/ra. 
Mark i. 11 <ri> el 6 vlos fj-ov 6 dyair., tv eroi evdoicyffa. 
Luke iii. 21, identical with Mark. 

The words of the Epistle agree most closely with the form in Matt., 
but stand alone in the position they assign to euros tanv, and in giving 
^Xc6, and els ov. 

18. 4v TW &yt(p tfpci. It was the Transfiguration that made the 
mountain holy (Bigg), just as the vision of the Burning Bush made 
that site "holy ground" (Exod. iii. 5). The "holy hill" par 
excellence of the O.T. is Mount Sion. 

It is interesting to note that the Acts of Peter (see Introd.) make 
St Peter select the story of the Transfiguration as the subject of a 
special discourse, perhaps from a recollection of the passage before 
us; there, too, the phrase holy mountain is used. 

19. Kal %\o\ It is best to connect this sentence with the pre- 
ceding. " The vision and the voice confirmed, and still confirm to us 
the authority of the prophets." Other commentators make these 
words the starting-point of a new topic. tf We Apostles had the 
evidence of the vision : you have what is better, because more per- 
manent the evidence of Scripture." 

It is worth noting that both in Peter's speeches in the Acts 
(ii. iii.) and also in the fragments of the apocryphal but early 
Preaching of Peter, great stress is laid on the evidence of prophecy ; 
so also in 1 Peter i. 10 12. 

u> KO.XWS iroieiTe irpoo-cxovTcs. Josephus Ant. xi. 6. 12 again 
has the same phrase, ofs Trot^o-ere /raXws firj irpoaexovrfs. 

Xu'xva) <J>avovTi 4v cuJxpipw TOIT<J>. There are two good instances 
of a similar phrase applied to an individual prophet. Our Lord says 
of John Baptist (Joh. v. 35), He was 6 \frxyo* 6 Karipevos Kal <f)a.lvuv : 
and in 4 Esdras (2 Esdras of our Apocrypha) xii. 42 the people say 
to Esdras, " (thou alone hast survived of all the prophets) sicut 
lucerna in loco obscuro" (we no longer possess the book in Greek). 

auxFHP^- The meaning, dark or dusky, which is undoubted here, 
is not the original one ; the word properly means dry and parched. 
The Apocalypse of Peter has our phrase, clearly in the sense of dark : 
" I saw a TOTrov...avxMpora.Tov, and those in it had their vesture dark, 
aKOTfivov...Karh, rov dtpa TOV roVou." 

&os o3 iijWpa 8iavya<rT), etc. Compare the refrain in the Song of 
Solomon, " Until the day break and the shadows flee away." 

.<f>axn|>6pos dvaTeCX-Q. Mai. iv. 2 speaks of the Sun of righteousness 
arising : in the Benedictus, Luc. i. 79, the Christ is aVaroX^ ^ 

2 Peter B 

i8 // PETER [1 19 

ftyous : the ancient hymn quoted in Eph. v. 14 says, 
6 Xptoros. These passages (except the last) point to the Second 
Coming as being meant by the dawn of day. But the words in your 
hearts make us think of the expression of our Lord, " the Kingdom of 
God is within you." The writer is addressing people who, though 
Christians, have not necessarily attained to the fullest understanding 
of the Gospel. The language should not be so pressed as to imply 
that it had not even dawned upon them as yet. The study of Scripture 
will be a help to them until God fully enlightens their hearts. 
20. TOVTO irpcorov -yivwo-KovTcs. The same words recur in iii. 3. 
iraou ov. Hebraistic for otde/j-la. 

irpo<J>T]Ta -ypcutnjs prophecy of Scripture included, contained in 

IStas 4m\vo-6<os ov yCverai. Words productive of much dispute. 
The principal meanings assigned to them have been: 

(a) Prophecy is not to be interpreted by private individuals 

apart from the Church. 

(6) It is not to be interpreted by man apart from the Holy 

(c) Does not come from human ingenuity : is not a successful 

attempt to solve a difficulty, originated by the prophet 

(d) It could not be interpreted by the prophet himself. He did 

not always know the meaning of the vision he saw. Daniel 
and Zechariah, for example, ask what it is that is shown 
to them. 

(e) Prophecy is not confined, not subject to, a single inter- 

pretation ; it is capable of many fulfilments besides the 
immediate and local one. 

Something similar is said in iii. 16. Unlearned persons wrest the 
Scriptures to their own destruction. There seems to be in both 
passages a warning against unauthorized interpretation of prophecy. 

The writer goes on here to assign a reason why prophecy is not t5tas 
^TriX&rews. " For it was not at any time conveyed by the will of 
man." The prophets themselves could not prophesy when and as they 
pleased. If that was the case, how little can you expect to interpret 
their prophecies without God's help ! Note that the aid of Christ 
Himself was required to "open" the Scriptures to the first disciples 
(Luc. xxiv. 25 etc., 44 etc.). Thus the warning against private and 
unauthorized exposition of prophecy seems to be most prominent ; 
but there may be also contained in the passage the greater truth that 
prophecy is capable of several and ever-widening fulfilments. 

2 1] NOTES 19 

OeXijua-n avOpwirov is opposed to &irb Oeov. 

Theophilus of Antioch, in a passage quoted on p. xviii, seems to 
paraphrase this verse, as well as to allude to v. 19. 

tiiro irvevjiaTos dyLov <J>ep6|X6voi, cf. 0o<p6p-)Tos, 0eo0opet<r0cu, the 
latter verb being often used of prophets by Philo, Justin, etc., quoted 
by Mayor. It may be right to emphasize the absence of the article 
from irvevfta, "borne by a holy spirit" of wisdom. Cf. Wisdom 
vii. 22. 

II. So far we have had but an introduction to the writer's chief 
topic. Throughout he has had in view the warning of his readers 
against a particular danger : so he has begun by insisting on their 
keeping firm in the right way. Now he begins to enlarge on his special 
subject, leading up to it by the mention of prophecy. The value of 
prophecy, he says, cannot be exaggerated, though its use must be 
guarded. But there was false prophecy in Israel, and false teaching 
is now coming in upon the new Israel. 

It is here also that the writer begins most clearly and continuously 
to use another source, the Epistle of Jude. There have been, in his 
first chapter, resemblances to its language (see Introd.), but from the 
point we have reached the parallels are much closer. 

t|/v8oirpo<J>TJTai. The primary force of $ev5o- in \f/vdoTrpo<f>7)Tai and 
\f/evdo5tdouTKa\oi is not that the prophets and teachers utter what is 
false, but that they are sham prophets and sham teachers they do 
not deserve the name. But of course the reason why they are so 
called is because they teach what is false. 

4v r<p Xa$, Israel, \aov Jude 5. 

irapi<raovcriv in an evil sense : irapeifffitpw was used in a good 
sense in i. 5. Cf. Trapei<ra.KTovs \(/ev8adt\<f>ovs in Gal. ii. 4. 

alp&ras airwXcCas. ai'pe<m is used in a neutral sense in Acts, of 
the Sadducees, of the Pharisees, and by an adversary, Tertullus, of 
the Christians : in xxiv. 14 Paul speaks of rrjv 65bi> yv Xtyovviv afyeviv, 
again not necessarily in an abusive sense. In his Epistles the thing is 
deprecated. 1 Cor. xi. 18, 19 couples aipteeis with o^^aTa : Gal. v. 20 
with dixovrafflai, so that it seems equivalent to " schism. " In Tit. iii. 10 
alperiKbv av5pa...TrapaiTov the context shows that what is meant is an 
opinionated and disputatious person. By the time of Ignatius (110) 
it is clearly used in our sense of heresy. He warns the Trallians 
"to abstain from the noxious herbs of heresy," and says to the 
Ephesians "Among you no heresy dwells." Here the general meaning 
is put out of doubt by the addition of the word cwrajXe/as, so that it is 
possible to hold that the writer could conceive of alphas that were 
not ' destructive," 


20 // PETER [2 1 

curwXeia is a favourite word with our writer, occurring again in this 
verse and in ii. 3, iii. 7, 16. 

Kal, emphatic. Even denying. 

ri>v d-yopdo-avra avrovs SecriroTTjv dpvovpevoi, Jude 4. 
The parallel with Jude forbids us to think that the incident of 
Peter's denial of his Master is referred to. 

d-yopdo-avTa. 1 Cor. vi. 20 riyopdo-OijTe y&p 7-1^775. Rev. v. 9 
addressed to the Lamb eo-Qayrjs KCLI rjyopao-as r$ dey tv T< at^arl <rou. 

In Acts xx. 28 this purchasing is ascribed to the Father, to whom 
the title Seo-Tror^s is applied wherever else it is used in N.T. (e.g. 
Luc. ii. 29, Acts iv. 24, Eev. vi. 10). Accordingly, some understand 
Seo-TTori/s of the Father here, and some of the Son. The phrase in 
Jude is rbv fwvov deffiroTijv /cat utipiov ?)/*&? 'I. X., which at first sight 
seems plainly to mean One Person, and that the Son : but there 
again it is pointed out that jttfptos is one of the words which in such a 
sentence can stand without an article, so that two Persons might be 
meant. I incline to interpret both passages as referring to the Son. 

Note that SCO-TTOT^S and dyopdfeiv give point to the word SoOXos so 
often used by the Apostles of themselves. 

2. dpvovi|wvoi. They deny by their lives that Christ is their Master, 
and also in some cases by their teaching: for many who had grown up 
in the strong Monotheism of the Jews and had accepted Christianity 
to some extent, denied the divinity of Christ. In 1 Joh. ii. 22 we 
read of some who denied that Jesus was Christ. 

aKoXov9TJ<rov<riv as i. 16. 

81 oOs "H 0865 TTJS dXT]0as pXa<r<J>T]|AT)9ii<rTcu. This thought, of 
bringing discredit on the Christian name, is not uncommon in N.T. : 
Bom. ii. 23-4, iii. 8, Tit. ii. 5, James ii. 7 : cf . Acts xix. 9. We know 
that, as a matter of fact, the most ghastly stories of the excesses of 
the Christians were current in Roman society. Though the greater 
part of these tales were due to the fact that Christians met secretly 
for worship, it is possible that the proceedings of the teachers described 
here may have supplied some material that was not fictitious. 

There is a coincidence of language here with the Apocalypse of 
Peter, 7, ol ^Xaa-^fj-ovvTes TTJV 656v r^s diKaiofftivris (see below, v. 21), 
and also, as noted on p. xviii, with the Apology of Aristides. 

The "way of truth" is a phrase due to Ps. cxix. 30. 

3. Kal 4v irXOVC<j K.T.\. A distinguishing mark of the false 
teachers was that they sought to make money : not merely to be 
supported by their hearers, which, as we see from St Paul's letters, 
was not considered wrong. ^7ro/>ei5e<r0cu is usually to traffic in some- 
thing : not quite so here : " you " are the source of profit to them. 

24] NOTES 21 

irXaorois usually "fictitious," as of a false accusation: here 
probably the thought is not so much of the falsity of the teaching, as 
of insinuating address : what St Paul in 1 Thess. ii. 5 calls \6yos 
KoXa/cetaj. He mentions Trp6(f>a<ns TrXeope^as in the same place. 

J-KiraXai again in iii. 5. 

4 sqq. el -yelp o 0eos /c.r.X. to the end of v. 10. The sentence has 
a different climax to that which we expect. The protasis is, 
roughly, this: " Speedy punishment awaits these men. For if God 
did not spare the angels... nor the old world at the Flood... nor Sodom 
and Gomorrah," the natural apodosis would be, " He will not spare 
these false teachers." But as a matter of fact the writer's thought is 
diverted, when he comes to his second example (of the Flood), to the 
preservation of Noah ; and, at his third example, to the saving of 
Lot. And so in his apodosis he puts the saving of the righteous 
from among sinners in the first place, though he does not omit the 
punishing of the wicked. 

Note that his examples vary from those in Jude, who has (1) the 
people saved out of Egypt, (2) the angels, (3) Sodom and Gomorrah. 
The first example in Jude is obscurely expressed, and perhaps this is 
why our writer substitutes another for it. 

Note also the recurrent participial construction : 

ayyc'Xwv duaprTja-avTwv K.T.\. The example is taken from the 
Book of Enoch. See Introd. p. xlvii. 

(mpois 6<{>ou raprapoMras irap'8K6V (Jude, Secr/Jiois ai'dLois virb 
6<f>ov TeT^pTjKev). There is a curious question of reading here : 

ABC have (mpots and tf cripots : KLP, the Latin Vulgate, the 
Syriac, and one Egyptian version <reipaus. o-ipois or treipois means 
pits, specially underground receptacles for the storage of grain. We 
do not find the word in that portion of Enoch which exists in Greek, 
but we read of angels and stars being confined underground in 
wildernesses in the glens (vd-rrcn) of the earth and in various 

orcipats " chains," answers to the Secr/xois of Jude, and chains are 
specially mentioned in Enoch ; but here again the word aeipal does 
not occur. Both words are uncommon, but <retpots is the more 
unusual : 0-eipcus would be an "elegant" word for chains, and it is 
rather characteristic of our writer to refine the vocabulary of Jude ; 
but in strength of attestation veipois has the better claim to be adopted. 

Tt]pov(jtvovs. Another reading /coXa^o/x^ous T-rjpeiv (the words 
occur again in v. 9) has rather strong attestation (KA, the Latin and 
Egyptian version; against BCKLP). Our author's style does not 


// PETER [2 4 

forbid us to think that he may have repeated the words just as he 
has repeated O$K tyetvaro in vv. 4 aud 5 and :6o>ios in v. 5. 

6. dpx.a(ov Kocrfiov. 6 rbre /c6<r/ios iii. 6. The absence of the 
article here is noticeable : in the next verse again it is absent (TroXeis 
K.T.X.). Ecclus. xvi. 7 oik e&Xdcraro irepi TU>V dpxatuv ycydv- 

o-ySoov with seven others : avrbv is commonly added in these 

Nut SiKcuo<ruvT]s KijpvKa. The ancient writing which lays most 
stress on Noah's preaching is the Sibylline Oracles, Book i. (a Jewish 
book altered by a Christian), which devotes some fifty lines to two 
addresses of Noah. There is also an allusion to it in 1 Peter iii. 20 
in the word a-n-eidfiffao-iv. 

5. 6. As in the next chapter, the destructive agencies of water and 
fire are here placed side by side. 

6. iroXeis SoSdjtwv. The genitive, as in urbs Romae, is of apposition. 
T4pcocras. Examples are quoted from Dion Cassius describing an 

eruption of Vesuvius, and from Lycophron (who in his so-called play 
the Alexandra or Cassandra heaps together all the obscure words he 
can find): 1. 227 Te0/>c6(ras yvia Ayfjivaty irvpL This means "reduce 
to ashes." The passage in Dion Cass. means "covered with ashes." 

KaTcwrrpo^fj xarcKpivEV is the reading of the large mass of 
authorities, BC alone omitting KaTa<rTpo<prj, and P reading nart- 
<rrpe\l/v. The meaning would be either " condemned by overthrow- 
ing" or "condemned to overthrow" (the latter unclassical, but 
paralleled by Matt. xx. 18 KaraKplvovviv avrbv davdry). I think the 
word should be restored to the text. 

viroStivfxa [wXXovTwv oio-epc'o-iv T0iKs = Jude TrpoKeivrai deiypa 
irvpbs aluvlov. For cure/36nv (BP) the bulk of authorities read aVe/SeiV, 
induced probably by the presence of jueXXoWcop, with which an infinitive 
is expected. A good parallel to these verses is in 3 Maccabees ii. 4, 
5 (in a prayer of the high- priest Simon) : 

2u TOI)S e/ATrpoffOev ddudav Trot.ria'a.vTas v ofs Kail yiytarres fj<ra.v 
Kal 6pd<rei ireiroidores 5i^00eipas, tirayayuv (cf. e7rcias) aurois df 
(J5w/3. 2i roi)s {fire pr)<pav lav epyafofdvovs 2o5o^ras...7Ti/)i Kal delqt 
Kar(f)\ej;as, irapddeiy[ji.a rots ^iriyevofdvois Karaa'Tr/a'as. 

The date of 3 Mace, is uncertain, but it is a Jewish book, probably 
written about the Christian era. 

7. viro TTJS TWV dOeVjittv kv dcrcX-yc^ dvao-Tpo^TJs. The structure 
reminds us of the clause i. 4 TTJS tv r< -60>tp tv eiriOv/j.tq. 00o/>as. 

dO^o-fuov again in iii. 17, and nowhere else in N.T. ^ctfeaytos is used 
by Philo of the inhabitants of the cities of the plain. 

2 10] NOTES 23 

8. A parenthesis, telling why Lot needed deliverance. 

S(KCUOS is preceded by the article 6 in all MSS. except B. Westcott 
and Hort follow B. Some difference in rendering is entailed; 
omitting 6 we translate " righteous in respect of looking and 
listening," like the man in Isa. xxxiii. 15 " that stoppeth his ears 
from hearing of blood, and shutteth his eyes from seeing evil." The 
Latin Vulgate takes this view, "aspectu enim et auditu iustus erat." 
Inserting 6, we must connect the datives /SX^ucm ical aKofj with ^3a<rd- 
vifrv as A.V., " in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul," etc. 

Tjjxe'pav e r l |i^pas = Ka0' Tj^pav. It occurs in Ps. xcvi. 2 (LXX) "Be 
telling of His salvation from day to day." 

t|<rdviev. Compare Apocalypse of Peter, 1, And then 
shall God come to my faithful ones that hunger and thirst and are 
afflicted, Ka.1 kv rotirtp T<$ fity rots ^i>x&s eavT&v doicifJuig'ovTa.s. But 
though the idea of testing may underlie tftaffdvifev here, it is not safe 
to discard the ordinary N.T. meaning of "tormented." 

The Latin Vulgate must have had a different text, which is not 
found in any Greek MS. It reads, "habitans apud eos qui de die in 
diem animam iustam iniquis operibus cruciabant," i.e. tv atrois oJ... 

9. The apodosis : see on v. 4. 

KoXa6|j.voi : present participle. In Enoch x. the sinful angels are 
bound in torment from the moment of their capture till the great day 
of judgment. 

10. With this verse the writer returns to the denunciation of the 
false teachers. Like the angels, the men before the Flood, the men 
of Sodom, they had sinned through lust. 

oirC<rw o-ctpKos in Jude 7. 

em0v[ju(jt (JLtao-|xov. Adjectival as cu/jecrets ctTrcoXet'as, ii. 1. 

KvpiorrjTOS Kara<j)povovvTas. This is the main theme of the next 
verse and of Jude 8, 9, 5oas otf rp^ovyi-v /SXacr^/ioGj/res K.r.X. The 
primary application of both /cupior^s and 56a may well be to orders of 
angels. The men of Sodom, in particular, had not recognised the 
angels. But the words seem to have another meaning when applied 
to the false teachers, and to indicate the authorities of the Church 
against whom they were in revolt. They are spoken of repeatedly as 
anarchists, and compared to Korah, who withstood Moses. We are 
reminded of the angels of the seven churches in Kev. i. iii., by whom 
the bishops of the churches are often thought to be meant. 

Kvpi<$rrjs is used by St Paul of a definite order of angels, Eph. i. 21 
(singular), Col. i. 16 (plural) ; " dominions" (A.V.) : in the medieval 
hierarchy of angels, Daminationes. 

2 4 // PETER [2 11 

11. A veiled description of the incident of Michael and Satan 
which is openly told in Jude 9. See Introd. p. xiv. 

12. Contrast this with Jude 10. Jude says : These men speak 
evil of what they do not know : what they do know by natural 
instinct, like irrational beasts, they turn to a bad use. 

2 Peter : These men, like irrational beasts, whose natural end is to 
be snared and killed, speaking evil of what they do not know (a vague 
phrase), will certainly perish. 

It affords a good example of the elaboration of Jude by our writer 
and of the consequent loss of clearness. Jude has a clear antithesis, 
which is set aside in 2 Peter : yet the language of the altered half of 
the antithesis (d\6ya a, 0wi/cd) is retained and used to a different end. 

Such is the impression I gather : Dr Bigg, on the other hand, 
says : ' ' Jude has rewritten this rugged sentence and made it much 
more correct and much less forcible." 

< Y6'Y VVT lH t * va -- < k --<}>0opav. "Wetstein gives a good illustration from 
a rabbinic source: "a calf led to the slaughter ran to Rabbi Judah, 
put its head into his bosom and wept : but the Rabbi said, ' Go : thou 
wert created for this end.'" 

v T-Q <j>0op K.r.X. Cf. tv tjji7raiyfj,ovfj ^irai/crat iii. 3. Best taken 
as an emphatic prediction of destruction. 

13. dSiKovpcvoi |ucr66v dSiKias. This is the reading of S (first 
hand) BP, one Syriac version and the Armenian; whereas a corrector 
of X, ACKL, the Latin, Egyptian, and another Syriac version give the 
undoubtedly easier Ko/j.ioijfj.evoi "destined to receive." It has rather a 
close parallel in Col. iii. 25, 6 yap d5i/cwv Ko//,<reTcu 6 rjdiKrjtrev . But 
the future (Ko/uotf/<tej>ot) is against the reading : all the other participles 
near by (and there are many) are in the present. 

ddiKofyevoi is quite hard to translate. I prefer the rendering of 
Tischendorf, " being defrauded in respect of the wages of iniquity." 
fjuvdbs ddiidas is used just below of Balaam : and like Balaam the false 
teachers will not receive the gain they hoped for, but destruction. 

If it were permissible to take dSt/cetv in the sense which it often has 
in Rev. (e.g. vii. 2, 3, etc.) of " hurting," we might render " being 
hurt as the reward for harming." But this is not in the manner of 
our author, and besides would seem to require d5i/c?7<reu>s, not d5i/das. 

T)8ovi)v ifyovjwvoi T ^ v | v ijp^pqi rpv<j)ijv. This hard clause fiuds an 
explanation in the Psalms of Solomon (1st century B.C.) xiv. 4. "Not 
so are the sinners and transgressors ot Tjyd-n-rjcrav rjfdpav tv 
cL/Aaprlas avru>f, tv fUKp6Tr}Tt <rcnrplas i) t-Tridv/Jiia (or v 
They were contented with a day while they were partners together 
in sin: their desire was in (was satisfied with) a short space of 

2 14] NOTES 25 

corruption." So these false teachers reckoned the shortlived enjoy- 
ment of a day to be true pleasure. 

Another good interpretation depends on a passage in the Assump- 
tion of Moses (iv. 4). Those who are denounced are described as 
"omni hora diei amantes conuiuia." This is in favour of the E.V. 
rendering, "men that count it pleasure to revel in the day-time." 
Compare Kom. xiii. 13 " let us walk honestly as in the day : not in 
revellings and drunkenness " etc. 

<nrX<n Kal HH<H, vrpv<|>a>vTS Iv rats diraTCiis avrwv <rwva>xot5- 
pcvoi vfj.iv. Jade 12 ofrrot el<ru> oi ev TCUJ dydirats 

dTrdrcus is read by X, the first hand of A and C, KLP and others ; for it 
B, the second hand of A and C, and the Latin have dydirais (agreeing 
with Jude). The addition of avrwv here is "in favour of dTrdrats." 
So Mayor, who also points out that dirdrais and crirL\oi are character- 
istic modifications of the similar dydirais and ffiriXddes in Jude. 

cnrCXos occurs in Eph. v. 27 /J.T) ^x ovffav ffirl\ov : and dWtXos in our 
Epistle (iii. 14) : the verb 0-7riX6w in Jude 23 and also in James iii. 6. 

fj.wp.os, which in classical Greek means reproach or disgrace, is used 
to mean blemish (as it does here) in the LXX. of Leviticus, aytutytos 
is in Jude 24. See also 1 Pet. i. 19. 

If we adopt the strongly supported reading dirdrcus it is not easy 
to get a clear notion of the meaning of the clause. Two ways of 
taking it are suggested : (a) revelling when they join in your feasts, 
to which by their deceitful conduct they have gained admission; 
(6) revelling in their deceitfulness, when they feast with you. In any 
case the writer has in his mind the love-feast of the Christians which 
these men perverted and profaned. 

14. 6<J>0oXjj,ovs ^XOVTCS pco-rovs |xoixaX8os. Dr Bigg unhesitatingly 
rejects /AotxctXtSos as a blunder for /ioix^as : the only various reading 
in the MSS. is /xotxaXias (KA and three cursives) which is not a possible 
word. fwixd\idos does not seem to yield a tolerable sense, though it is 
accepted by commentators as meaning "eyes which see an adulteress 
in every woman." The general sense "eyes full of lust" is undoubted. 

dKdTairaoTOvs dfiapTtas. So AB. The other authorities give d/cara- 
7ratf<TToi>s (compare for the idea 1 Pet. iv. 1 irtiravrai d,ua/>Ttas). Hort, 
preferring cUaraTrcio-Tovs, says that it might be explained as a derivative 
of Tratfoj on the strength of such forms as dvaira^fferai : but prefers to 
take it as meaning insatiable, and derives it from Trdvaffdai 
which according to Athenaeus was used in his time to = 
so that d/cardTraaros = diracrros etc. But Mayor points out that aTrcurros 
etc. wherever found means " fasting." 

26 // PETER [2 14 

, exercised in, familiar with : used with 
', cro<plas by Philostratus. 
Karapas r^cva means no more than "accursed." We hear of 
"children of obedience" (1 Pet.), "son of perdition" (Joh.), "sons of 
disobedience" (Eph.). 

15. <xKoXov0T]<ravTs, for the third time in this Epistle (i. 16, ii. 2). 
The sentence about Balaam is loosely constructed. There are some 
various readings. For Bewp (B and two versions) B6<ro/> is read by the 
other uncials except S which has Bewopaop, showing a consciousness 
of both forms. B6<ro/> cannot be satisfactorily explained. 

Next, for 5s /uo-0. dSiK. rjydiryo-ev, B and one version read /u<r0. ddiK. 
'fjydTrrjo-av. But this cannot be right, for 2<rxev in the next clause must 
refer to Balaam, and the change of subject is intolerably awkward. 

16. I8fas seems unnecessarily emphatic : it may not have been so 
intended by the writer. In later (and in modern) Greek the word 
tends to lose its force and become little more than a possessive. 

irpo<j>i]Tov is put in to mark the contrast with the virotyyiov &<puvov. 
iropa<j>pova is not found elsewhere : but forms in -wtivri (we should 
expect irapa.<ppo<riji'r)) and in -ovia do exist side by side, as 

These two verses 15, 16 are based on a single verse in Jude (11) otfal 
(hence /card/ms TKVO) 6'rt r$ 68$ TOV Katv tiropevdrjffav (/caraXef- 
evdciav odbv ^Tr\avr}6r]a'av 2 P.) Kal rfj Tr\dvr] TOV BaXad/u. fuffOov 
Jude adds Kal ry dvTtXoytq. TOV Kopt dTrciXovro : but our 
writer as before (4 10) deserts his original in order to amplify one of 
the examples used. 

17. "Waterless springs and mists driven by a gale: for whom 
darkness is reserved." In Jude the list of comparisons is longer; 
Waterless clouds, barren trees, wild waves, wandering stars, for 
whom darkness is reserved. It is conceivable that some words have 
dropped out of the text of our Epistle. 

mryaC. One who sets up to be a teacher ought to be a fountain of 
wisdom. These men yield none. 

6p.i\Xai /c.T.X. "Mists" which veil the light, not clouds which 
promise fertilising rain. And the mists are to be swept away by a 
tempest into darkness. Compare Wisdom v. 14 " the life of the 
ungodly is ws <pepbfj.evos x v v* 7r6 dvtyov Kal ws ir^vt] vir6 Xo/XaTros 

ots 6 I,6<f)os K.T.X. This cannot be pressed into connexion with the 
metaphor of springs : to the mists it is not inapplicable. In its 
original place in Jude it applies, with complete suitability, to stars. 
The masculine ofs here must, as the text stands, be referred to the 

2 19] NOTES 2^ 

men who are described under these various images : hut a lacuna 
seems not improbable. 

18. vTre'povKo. /c.r.X. kv ImOvfucus <rapKos. This is the last case of 
borrowing from Jude for some time. It answers to Jude 16 KO.TO. ras 
Tri6vfji.las avruv Tropevdfievoi Ka.1 T& ffrb^o. ovTuv XaXei virtpayKO.. 

4v eiri6v|iai.s crapKos cureX-yeicus. <ra/u-6s is best taken with e-rri- 
dv/j.Lcus. The whole phrase is rather pleonastic to our ideas. ao-eXyelais 
serves perhaps to define eiriO. era/we. The general meaning is that the 
false teachers proclaimed to their followers the lawfulness of indulgence 
in passions, under the name of Christian liberty, and so converts who 
had been nearly drawn away, and with great difficulty, from the 
licence which prevailed in heathen society were now slipping back. 
Their first teachers had preached to them the importance of purity : 
these new ones told them that it was of no consequence. The havoc 
which such teaching must have wrought upon the morals and upon 
the very being of young Christian communities amply justifies the 
tremendous denunciation which we find here. 

TOUS oXfyws diro<f>v < yovTo,s K.T.\. For dXiyus (AB, a corrector of X, 
and Syriac, Latin and Egyptian) a group including KCKLP reads 
OVTUS. For airofatyovras (KABC) the aorist participle airo<t>vy6vTas is 
read by KLP. 

dXlyus is rendered in the Vulgate by paululum, for a little time : it 
is an uncommon word, but is found meaning " in a slight degree " and 
(inapplicable here) "quickly." The escape is recent or incomplete. 

TOVS ev irXavg ava<rTpj>ojj^vovs : almost certainly the heathen. 

19. eXevOcpCav /c.r.X. This degeneracy of liberty into licence was a 
constant danger, -jrdvra gfcffTiv dXX' ou ir&vra <ru^0^pei (1 Cor. x. 23). 
Gal. v. 13 pbvov IJ.TI TTJV t\ev6eplav els d0o/)^V Ty (rapid. 1 Pet. ii. 16 
ju^ cos ^TriKaXu^/ia ZXOVTCS TT}S Kaiclas r^r\v eXevdepiav. Men have been 
found in all ages to say either openly or in effect : " Rules made for 
weaker brethren do not apply to me : I have penetrated into the 
mysteries of divine things, and know that what my body does 
cannot affect my soul." But this, as our writer points out, is just 
where they are mistaken; they become slaves of the most abject 
kind to their habits and passions. Yet, slaves as they are, they dare 
to promise freedom to others 1 

$ yap TIS fJTnjTai, TOVTO> SeSouXcurai : so Sophocles in old age spoke 
of passion as a XVTTWV /cat Aypios 5e<nr6r77$ from whom he had 
escaped. Whoever committeth sin is the slave of sin, Jo. viii. 34 : 
of. Ko. vi. 16. 

Another kindred thought is that in Wisdom xi. 16 5i' uv TIS aftap- 
rdvei, 8ia rotruv /toXdfercu : a ruling idea in the Apocalypse of Peter. 

28 II PETER [2 20 

20. diro<j>uYovTS rd |iid(r|j.aTa roO KOO-JJ-OV. We revert to the 
language of chapter i. (i. 4 diroQvybvres rrjs tv T Kdcr/juf tv <?7ri0u/^p 
00o/)as). iv eiri-yvcScrei K.T.X. i. 2. 

In the words 8e\edeu>, aTrofatiyeut, yrraffdcu we have fresh 
instances of our author's tendency to use words over again at short 

rd go-xara \etpova. TWV irpwrwy, one of the few citations of our 
Lord's words in the Epistle (see Introd. p. xxiv). These occur in 
Matt. xii. 45. 

21. njv 686v TTJS SiKcuo<rvvT|s occurs in the Apocalypse of Peter, 
7, 13. It is not a common phrase. 

22. TO TTIS d\T)0ovs irapotjjifas : a usual phrase for introducing a 
proverb, as Lucian, Dialogues of the Dead, viii. 1, TOUT' Ifccfro rb TTJS 

Kvcov etc. The equivalent is in Prov. xxvi. 11, the LXX. has fyerov 
for t^papa which is a very unusual word. 

*Ys Xovo-a^vrj "after a wash." In the ancient History of Ahikar 
(ed. Eendel Harris 1898) which the writer may well have known, 
there is a proverb of the pig that went to the bath, and on coming 
out saw some mud and rolled in it. 

There may be a second thought in the writer's mind of the latter 
end of these men in the /36/)/3o/>os of Hell : which figures in the Apoca- 
lypse of Peter, as it did also in the Orphic mysteries. 

III. 1. It is natural to most of us on a first reading to assume 
that the first Epistle here alluded to must be what we know as 
1 Peter ; but this has been denied by critics of eminence, who hold 
that 1 Peter does not answer to the description before us: and further 
that 2 P. speaks of personal intercourse between writer and readers 
(i. 16 tyvwplira/j.ej' v/juv) which is not the case in 1 Peter. One point 
which is urged is undeniably true, namely, that many apostolic letters 
must have perished, and there is no necessity to regard 1 Peter as 
being meant : but the objections to doing so are not conclusive. 

viro|ivr<ri occurred above, i. 13. 

r), pure, genuine, unmixed : then pure, morally. elXiKpivets 
Kal a7r/>6(TK07rot in Phil. i. 10 is the only other occurrence of the 
adjective in N.T. The substantive dXiKplveia is coupled with dX^^eia 
in 1 Cor. v. 8. 

2. nvn<r0f vai K .T.X. He is specially anxious to hold his readers fast 
to their first beliefs in view of the new false teaching. 

crytwv irpo<J>t]T<3v as in the Beiiedictus, Luke i. 70. 

Kal TTJS TWV diroo-ToXwv tnv evToXrjs T. Kvp. K. o-amjpos. The 
array of genitives has its awkwardness, but is not obscure. 

3 4] NOTES 29 

TWV dir<xrr<J\ttv v|iv : THJ.WV (a very natural alteration) is read by 
some cursives, but no uncials. " The preachers who evangelized you," 
not necessarily the Twelve, may be meant ; but this is one of the 
phrases which suggest that the Epistle belongs to the sub-apostolic 

3. With this verse we return to the borrowing from Jude (17) vfjieis 
5^, dyairijTol, nvrjaOyTe TUV pTj/j-druv TUIV irpoLp-rjfji^i>(i}v virb rSiv diro<TT6\(>}v 
r. Kvp. TJ/J.. 'I. X. 

TOVTO TTpwrov -yivwo-KOVTcs, above, i. 20. The grammar is loose. 

tfn 4Xev<rovrai K.T.X., the last considerable borrowing, from Jude 18 
XP^ VOV foovrai ^CTTCUKTCU /card TOLS eavruv tiri.dviJ.las iropev6- 

The possibility that both writers are independently quoting the 
same prophecy has been mentioned and dismissed in the Intro- 

A passage from an apocryphal book (unknown, but not improbably 
the prophecy of Eldad and Medad) which is quoted both in the 
genuine Epistle of Clement of Borne (cir. 90 A.D.) and in the ancient 
sermon known as his Second Epistle deserves to be given here. 
"Miserable are the waverers, that waver in their soul and say, 
' These things we heard long ago even in our fathers' days, but we, 
expecting them day after day, have seen nothing of them.' (Variant : 
' And, lo, we have grown old, and none of these things has befallen 
us.') fools, compare yourselves to a tree. Take the vine. First it 
sheds its leaves, then comes a shoot, then a leaf, then a flower, then 
a young grape, and then the cluster is ready. Even so also my people 
hath suffered disturbance and affliction and thereafter shall be re- 
compensed with good." 

Similarly an ancient Jewish comment on Ps. Ixxxix. 50 "slandered 
the footsteps of thine anointed " is "they have scoffed at the slowness 
of Messiah's coming"; and again "He delays so long, that they say, 
He will never come." 

It is possible that our writer is referring to the Jewish book quoted 
by Clement, or to a similar source. At least we see that the mur- 
muring was current outside Christian circles. 

6H.irai-yH.ovfj, this form occurs here only, tfj.ira.iyiji.6s, -/j.a are the 
forms used in Biblical Greek. 

4. Iloii lorlv K.r.X. They ask the question, not as those who long for 
the fulfilment of the promise, but as disbelieving that it will ever be 
fulfilled : and therefore they are at liberty to indulge their passions 
(iropev6iJ,evoi, etc.). 

irapovo-tas, above i. 16. 

3 o // PETER [3 4 

ol irar^pes. Cf. M rQ>v irartpuv in the prophecy quoted above from 
Clement. The phrase inevitably suggests that the first generation of 
Christians had passed away. 

OVTWS, in statu quo. Compare the reading of some Latin authorities 
in Joh. xxi. 22, Sic or Si sic eum uolo manere. 

The unbelievers say : Where is the promise of His coming ? the 
first disciples to whom it was promised are dead, and there is no sign : 
the world goes on in its course as it has since the creation. That is 
where you are wrong, replies our writer. It has not gone on without 
one great convulsion. There was the Deluge ; and there will be the 
final fire. 

5. on ovpavol^oxtv K.T.\. There were of old heavens and an earth, 
(the latter) having its being out of water (it rose out of the water over 
which the Spirit brooded) and 5i' tiSaros. This difficult expression I am 
inclined to interpret as "between the waters," supported on water, 
according to Jewish belief, and with an over-arching firmament above 
which were waters. Compare the use of dia to express intervals : 
Sict xp6vov, Sict TT^VTC crraSiwv etc. 

gtciraXai, above, ii. 3. 

Tp TOV 0ov Xo-yw = p^/iari deov Heb. xi. 3. 

6. 81* cv. I am inclined (in spite of the fact that the word is 
rather remote in position) to think that otipavol is the antecedent of u>v . 
" There were heavens. . .by means of which the old world was deluged." 
The other alternative, that the two " waters " are the antecedent, also 
yields a fairly good sense. Mayor with one good cursive MS. reads 
Si &v and refers it to X67<>$. De Zwaan (1909) agrees. 

6 r6rt KOO-JJIOS, cf. dpxaibs Kba/Jios ii. 5. The human beings who 
perished at the Flood are primarily meant. 

7. ol 8i vvv ovpavoC. He seems to speak of the Flood as if it 
had destroyed heaven and earth (in the Book of Enoch hyperbolical 
language of that kind is used of the Flood Ixxxiii. 3, in a vision "the 
heaven collapsed and was borne off and fell to the earth ") : and it 
may have been his view that the upper firmament did fall in and 
overwhelm the earth. But the general run of thought seems to be 
this. Of old the heavens were the means of destruction : in the 
future the heavens themselves will be destroyed (by fire). 

T0T)<ravpio-|i^voi irup, stored up reserved for fire ; not stored 
with fire, which would mean that there was fire latent in them which 
would some day burst forth and consume them. That was the belief 
of Valentinus, a great heretical teacher of cent. ii. 

Tt]pOV|JLVOt K.T.\. Cf. U. 4, 9. 

8. vjxas, emphatic, opposed to atfrotfs in v. 5. 

3 10] NOTES 31 

Not only are the mockers mistaken as to the immutability of the 
world : they forget also (but you must not) that time is nothing in 
God's sight. He delays His vengeance in mercy, but it will come. 

pta. i]|i^pa K.r.X. The words go back to Ps. xc. 4 x/Xta try ev 6(pda\- 
fj,oiis (TOV tl)s i] TjfJitpa i) e"x,de^ ^' T ' s StTJ\6ev, Kal <pv\aKrj ev vvKrl. 

The writer does not apply the words in a sense which very usually 
attached to them among Jews and Christians. The belief arose (we 
cannot exactly trace by what steps), that since the world had been 
created in six days, and since a day and a thousand years are in God's 
sight the same, so it would last six thousand years ; and, as at 
creation the seventh day of rest followed, so the six thousand years 
would be succeeded by a seventh thousand of Sabbatical rest, the 
Millennium, as it is commonly called. We cannot dwell upon the 
importance of the belief in a Millennium : but the text before us was 
constantly invoked in support of that belief. 

9. ppaSvvei with a genitive only here : it is compared with the use 
of d/iaprdvw, vffrepetv, XeiTreadai. 

|xaKpo9vjjL6i. Cf. 1 Pet. iii. 20 aTreid-/i<ra<riv ore dire^eoexfro -rj TOV 
deov /j.aKpo0vfAia iv ijfj.e'pais Nwe. 

els Evidence is divided here both as to the preposition and 
the pronoun. 

els BCKLP Armenian, one Egyptian version. 

5t' KA 3 good cursives, Latin, one Egyptian version (the older), 
Syriac, Aethiopic. 

vfj,as KABCP, most versions. 

TJ/JMS KL, later Egyptian version. 

\i.r\ (3ovXo|iv6s rivas diro\<r0at dXXct iravras K.T.\. The first clause 
is emphasized greatly in Ezek, xviii. With the second we may 
compare 1 Tim. ii. 4 TOV o-wr^pos THJ.UV deov 6s Trdfras &v0p^Trovs 6e\ei 
<T(>}0TJvai Kal e/s eirlyvdxnv aXyOelas e\6eiv. 

10. "Hi 8 Tj|Apa Kvpiov us KX^irrrjs. This must have been a 
commonplace of Apocalyptic prophecy. We have the image in the 
eschatological discourse of our Lord, Matt. xxiv. 43 "If the goodman 
of the house had known in what watch (of the night) the thief would 
come " and again in Luke xii. 39. In 1 Thess. v. 2, Ye know clearly 
on ijfdpa ~Kvpiov ws K\eirr^ ev vvKrl OVTUS tpxercu (whence the MSS. 
CKL add iv vvxrl here). Rev. iii. 3 T;W ws K\tirTT)s, xvi. 15 I8ov 

ol ovpavol...TrapXv<rovTai. Me. xiii. 31 6 otpav&s Kal -f) y^j trape- 
\erj<TovTat. The destruction of the heavens, which were thought of as 
a solid firmament arched over the earth, is spoken of in Isa. xxxiv. 4 
i 6 ovpavbs wj fii.p\lov. This whole verse of Isaiah seems 

3 2 // PETER [3 10 

to have been introduced into the Apocalypse of Peter. It is quoted in 
Eev. vi. 13, 14 KO! 6 otipavks direxupto'O'r) ws fiifi\lov e\i<r(r6/j.evov and in 
the Sibylline oracles in. 81 oir&rav debs aidepi vaLwv \ otipavbv elXlj-y 
K0.6' direp f3ip\toi> eiXetrcu. 

poiq86v, with a rushing or whizzing round : K\ayyi}d6v, Kovafir)- 
Sbv are words of similar formation also descriptive of sound. 

oroixefoi. The heavenly bodies are very probably intended. 
(rroixa was used in the sense of "luminaries": in a letter of 
Poly crates the bishop of Ephesus (about 190 A.D.) he says " among us 
also (in Asia, that is, as well as in Home) f^eyaXa <rroixe?a KeKoL^vrai. 
great luminaries rest": and he goes on to specify John the Evangelist 
and others. 

St Paul's use of aroixeia Gal. iv. 3, Col. ii. 8, 20 is interpreted as 
meaning the spiritual beings who have charge of the stars and of 
other provinces of creation. 

Kau0-ov| must be from Kavvdofjiai, a medical word applied to fever- 

6vpe0i]<rT<H. See Introd. p. xlix. 

A passage in the Sibylline oracles n. 252 sqq. shows what is meant 
by tpya and favours the reading ovx evpeO^a-erai. 

KOVKCTI Trw-fiffoitrai ev rj^pi aTrXerot o'/veis, 
otf f$a vrjKTa 0d\a<r(rav #Xws TI VTrx^iffovTai, 
oil vavs ^/i^opros tiri /ci//ta<rt irovToirop-fjffei, 
01) /S6es lOvvrrjpes apoTpeij(rov(riv Apovpav, 
odic T7X OS dtvdpuv dvtpuv OTTO- d\\' afj.a -rrdvra 
els v yuvttati KQ.I ets Kadapbv SiaX^et. 

11. Xvopevuv possibly implies that creation is even now declining 
to its fall: but compare the present tenses of r^/ferai, Ka.Tot.Kei 

irorairovs, a late form and use : 7ro5a7r6s "of what nation" is the 
classical word. Our word occurs elsewhere in N.T. and in the 
Apocalypse of Peter. 

virapx^iv, how ought you to be equipped ready for the catastrophe 
when it comes. 

dvao-Tpo<f>ats, evcrcfSeCais, plural as <i(re\yeiais several times above. 

12. oircvBovTas. The thought is well compared with Peter's words 
in Acts iii. 19. Bepent...fiirws &v eXdwviv Kaipol dva^tj^eus. As sins 
(cf. v. 9) delay the coming, so righteousness will accelerate it. 

0ov ii^pas, usually fy*. KvpLov. In Bev. xvi. 14 we have "the great 
day of God Almighty." 

8t' TJV. ev $ above in v. 10. We might render " on the occasion of 
which " : the destruction takes place because the Day has come. 

3 16] NOTES 33 

Notice the repetition of words, XvOrfffovrai, (rrotx a > 
We have already encountered many such in our text. 

n]KTcu is the reading of KABKL. C has Ta/cifa-eTcu, P raK^ffovrai. 
Hort conjectures r^erat, which is found with a passive sense in 

13. Kaivous 8i ovpavovs K.T.\. The new heaven and earth are 
prophesied in the concluding chapters of Isaiah : Ixv. 17 &TTCU yap 6 
ovpavbs Kaivbs Kal }] yrj Kaiv^, Ixvi. 22 ov rpbirov yap 6 oupavbs KCLIVOS Kal 
i] 777 KOUVII d tyu TTOIW, cf. li. 6 Lift up your eyes to the heavens, etc. 

The prediction is quoted in Kev. xxi. 1. Kal elSov ovpavbv Katvbv 
Kal yrjv Kaw-f)v 6 yap TrpcDros ovp. K. i) irp&Tr) yy airrj\6av. 

v ols SiKttuxruvt] KaroiKei. Cf. Isa. i. 21 of Jerusalem, h fj 
SiKaioavvrj ^KOL/jL-^d-rj tv aurg and xxxii. 16 dtKaiofffo-r} tv ry Kap/A^Xy 
KaToiKrj<rei, together with what follows. 

14. Cf. Jude 24 (rr^erai Karevdoiriov rrjs d6^tjs aiJroO d/w,c6/ious. The use 
of evpedTjvai is rather like that in Phil. iii. 9 " that I may be found in 
Him, not having my own righteousness," etc. 

15. Ko,6cos Kal 6 <rya7rr|T6s t]p.wv dSe\({>os IlavXos. It has been 
usual to take /catfws as referring to the topic of the end of the world, 
and to suppose that the Epistles to the Thessalonians are specially 
indicated. But others (incl. Mayor) would refer Kadus to the sen- 
tence immediately preceding about fj,aKpodv/j,ia, and point to certain 
passages in Romans, especially ii. 4 Kal rrjs fj,ai<o6v/j,ias Kara^poveis 
ayvo&v 6Vi rb \prfffrbv TOV 6eov els fj-erdvoidv <re &yei; also iii. 25, 26, 
ix. 22, 23, xi. 22, 23. vjjui> would then naturally mean that this 
Epistle is itself addressed to the Komans. 

Kara rfjv 8o0i<rav av-no (ro<f>{av. Cf. 1 Cor. iii. 10 Kara TTJV "X&pw 
TOV 6eov TTJV SodelffOiv /JLOI. 

16. v irdo-ais cirio-roXaiS. irdvais rats is read by KKLP : ABC 
omit the article, and are followed by Westcott and Hort. The phrase 
reads very awkwardly without it. There is no great difference in 
sense, whether we read " in all letters " or "in all his letters." 

iv ats rrlv Svo-voTjTa rtva /c.r.X. Not specially referring to the 
subject of fj.aKpo6v[jiia, nor to the end of the world, but, generally, to 
those parts of Pauline teaching which had been exaggerated or mis- 
represented, e.g. about things offered to idols (1 Cor. viii. etc.) : 
utterances about the Law which might form an excuse for men to say 
that they were not bound by the Decalogue (Rom. iii. 20, vii. 7 11 
etc.) : of becoming all things to all men : and so on. 

ws Kal rds Xoiirds Ypa<f>ds. If the phrase occurred in a later docu- 
ment, we should not hesitate to render it " the rest of the Scriptures" 
and to take it as including both O.T. and N.T. Scriptures. But the 
2 Peter C 

34 // PETER [3 1618 

fact that we have here a writing under the name of an Apostle, and of 
early date, causes a difficulty. We shall be overstating the case if we 
say that the writer here places Paul's Epistles exactly on a level with 
the O.T. and implies the existence of a body of Christian Scriptures 
that were so regarded : but it is fair to say that he knows of the 
Pauline Epistles as writings read to Christian congregations and 
on the way to be put upon the level of Canonical Scripture. Of. 
p. xxviii. 

17. d&o-|xci>v, irXdvfl, ii. 7, 18. 

s Gal. ii. 13, Bapti/Sas 

18. av>fjavT iv x*P lTl > f * 8 irXeovd^ovra. a^dvio is oftener than 
not intransitive in N.T. but in classical Greek transitive, and so in 
1 Cor. iii. 6 (6 0e6s ytifrvev). 

els i^pav alwvos. An uncommon phrase : Ecclus. xviii. 10 is 
quoted : as a drop of water out of the sea, or a grain of sand, OVTUS 
6Xlya try tv wtpy. ai'wvos. It is strange to find this expression in a 
doxology, where ds TOVS a/wvas (T&V aiuixav) is almost invariable. 


The passage iii. 5 13 is the only one in the New Testament which 
speaks of the destruction of the world by fire. The coming of Christ, 
the Kesurrection, and the Final Judgment are dwelt upon by other 
writers, but of a general conflagration nothing is said by them. This is 
a noteworthy fact ; so widely spread is the notion of a final fire, that 
it comes as a surprise to most people when they realize how very 
slender is the Biblical foundation for that belief. 

Whence did our author derive it ? We know that the Stoics held 
that there would be an ^7rfy>w<ris of the world: but their view was 
that it was an event which would recur at the end of vast periods of 
time, and that each burning would be succeeded by a ira\iyyeve<ria, a 
re-constitution of the world. This differs from the Christian idea, 
which was that there would be one final burning, and that human 
history would not repeat itself. 

Among the Jews the belief was entertained by some : but it has not 
left any considerable trace in the apocalyptic literature. Philo argues 
strongly against the Stoic belief in his tract on the Incorruptibility of 
the World. 

In certain early Christian books pretending to high antiquity the 
final fire is dwelt upon. The fourth book of the Sibylline oracles, 


which is assigned to the reign of Titus or Domitian (and is appealed 
to upon this point by Justin Martyr in his Apology) says (172 177) : 

el 5' oti 1*01 treldoiaBe Kaic6<f>poi>es... 

wvp l<rrcu Kara Kfrfffiov 8\ov... 

0X^ei 6e x^^ va TTO-GO-V, airav 5' 6X6rei ytvos av$p(av 

Kal irdffas 7r6Xeas Trora^otfs &' afia $52 6d\aff<rav, 

^KKatiffei 5^ re iravra, ic6vis 5' J-<rer' aldaXdeffffa. 

There is a longer description in the later second book of the oracles 
(196 213). It is pretty clear that this book derives its matter very 
largely from the Apocalypse of Peter, in which we now know that 
the burning of the world was described at some length. See the 
Additional Note, p. Ivii. 

Justin Martyr also appeals to a book called Hystaspes as agreeing 
with the Sibyl. This we no longer possess, but we can tell from 
scattered quotations that it was a prophecy revealed to an ancient 
king of the Medes ; it seems to have been Christian, and quite early 
in date. 

Another early book which speaks of this, in words which recall 
2 Peter, is the so-called Second Epistle of Clement (really a sermon of 
the second century) : cap. xvi. ywdo-Kere 5e 8n tpxercu $5?) TI yfttpa rrjs 
Kplffeus ws K\lj3avos Kcuo/iepos (Malachi iv. 1 idov y^pa ^p^ercu KOLIO^VT) 
us /cXt/Safos) Kal Ta.K'fjffovTal rives (corrupt : perhaps ai 5wd/xets) r&v 
otipavuit (Isa. xxxiv. 4 and Apocalypse of Peter, quoted above), Kal 
iraaa r/ yij ws /toXt/So? tirl irvpi r-rjKo^evos, Kal r6re <j>avfi<Terai ra Kptifaa 
Kal <f>avepa Zpya r&v avd p&irw . Can this last clause (Kal r6re <J>av/i<rrai 
/c.T.X.) be taken as showing that the writer actually had 2 Peter before 
him, and that his copy of it read evpeBrio-erai ? One is tempted to 
guess that this was the case, and that he interpreted ra iv avrois Zpya 
evpedrjverai as meaning " the works that are therein shall be mani- 

It is not practicable to trace the gradual growth of the belief : but 
it did grow, and in later times at least, when the Sibylline oracles 
and other such books were forgotten, the passage in 2 Peter became 
the authoritative one on the subject. 



1. 'I-rjo-ov Xpwrrov SovXos. So in James i. 1 (where deov Kat is 
prefixed) : the word is also in 2 P. i. 1 5. nal dir6<rTo\os 'I. X. 

a8e\<j>6s 8* 'laKwpov. Jude was a "brother of the Lord" but does 
not say so, perhaps from motives of humility. The person he mentions 
is, there can be little doubt, James the first bishop of Jerusalem. 
Three persons of this name are mentioned in N.T., (1) James the son 
of Zebedee, "James the great" martyred by Herod (Acts xii.), (2) James 
the son of Alphaeus Matt. x. 3, Mark iii. 18, in the list of the Twelve, 
coupled with Thaddaeus : Luke vi. 15, between Thomas and Simon 
Zelotes, Acts i. 13 between Matthew and Simon, (3) James the 
brother of the Lord, Matt. xiii. 55, Mark vi. 3. This last was the 
first bishop of Jerusalem, and presided at the council of Acts xv. 

It has been usual in the Western Church to identity nos. 2 and 3 of 
the above list. The Eastern Church, however, has always com- 
memorated three Jameses, and there can be little doubt that this is 
the right view. Of James the son of Alphaeus we really know nothing 
beyond his name. 

TOIS Iv 06<j> irarpC /c.r.X. A difficult sentence. The late uncial 
MSS. KLP give 77710,07x^015 for ijyair^^vo^ (NBA) which is a very 
much easier reading, but on that account suspicious. Westcott and 
Hort suggest that tv is out of place and that we ought to read rots 
6e$ irarpl yyairyfji.. /ecu h 'I. X. Teryprj/j,. The possibility has been 
suggested (by Bishop Chase) that after tv a place-name was meant to 
be inserted (as in Eph. i. 1) : the letter being a circular letter, and 
the name varied according to the place where it was read. The 

sentence would run " to those at who are beloved of God the 

Father " etc. As they stand the words are not free from confusion, 
and I believe that their order must be incorrect. It would be better 
if fiyairy/Atvois followed K\T]TOIS. The three substantives in the next 

4] NOTES 37 

verse may each refer to one of these three descriptive words, thus : 
\eos to AcXi7To?s, for the calling of God shows His mercy : elprjvtj to 
TeTrjp-rj/uitvois, for peace is the condition of those who are kept safe : 
dyd-n-rj to -fjyainj^vo^. I do not think it altogether safe to build 
much upon words which are in the nature of a formula : yet this 
particular salutation is not identical with any other in N.T. The 
substantives in Kom., 1, 2 Cor., Gal., Eph., Phil., Col., 1, 2 Thess., 
Tit., Philemon, are x<fys (iifiv) Kal eip^vr] : so too in Rev. (i. 4), 1, 
2 Pet. In 1, 2 Tim. x<*p, Aeos Kal elprivrj : also 2 Jo. 3. So Jude 
does use a form which is varied, doubtless intentionally. The verb 
irkrjdvvdelt) is common to him and 1, 2 Pet. 

3. 'A-yainjToC recurs in 17, 20 and often in 2 Peter. It is also 
frequent in 1 John, but there a great many other forms of address 
are used as well. 

irdtrav o-irovSijv -iroiovfwvos Ypa<j>iv...dvd < yKT]v &r\ov ypd\|/ai. Dis- 
tinguish between the use of the present tense in the first clause and 
that of the aorist in the second : we may infer that Jude was contem- 
plating the writing of a treatise (or more probably an Epistle) on more 
general lines irepl TTJS KOIVTJS ffioryplas, when he was suddenly compelled 
to write at short notice and warn his readers against a special danger. 
We are reminded of the intention expressed in 2 Peter i. 1215. 

en-cry a>vi?o-9cu : not common in the sense of defending, which is its 
meaning here. Plutarch (quoted by Mayor) speaks of the philosopher 
Cleanthes ^Traywi/i^uei/os rfj ttcn-vpucrei, i.e. defending the Stoic doctrine 
of the destruction of the world by fire. 

Tfl airo TrapaSoGei'crT] rots cryiois ir(rT6i. a?ra " once for all," cf. v. 5 
and Heb. vi. 4. irapadodelo-y, compare the Pauline use in 1 Cor. xi. 2, 
2 Thess. ii. 15, and the Tra/ratf^/cr; of 1 Tim. vi. 20. aylois. Bodies of 
Christians are called dytoi in Acts ix. 32, 41 (at Lydda and Joppa), 

1 Cor. xvi. 1 etc. 

irfrrra. Here not the act of believing but the truths believed. 
Paul preached the faith, rijv Tflanv^ which once he used to destroy 
(Gal. i. 23). The phrase belongs to a time when a creed (of however 
simple a kind) was delivered to converts by their teachers : a con- 
fession of faith which they were required to repeat in public at the 
time of their baptism. 

4. irapi<re8t>T]crav /c.r.X. It is here that the parallelism with 

2 Peter begins most obviously. To comment upon the matter common 
to the two Epistles would be to repeat the notes on 2 Peter. I shall 
therefore only call attention to selected points. 

irpo-y?Ypa|i|j.'voi. Not " predestinated " but predicted by Enoch 
(v. 14) and others. 

38 ST JUDE [4 

Xapira (JLTaTi0^VTs els cur&'ytiav. By making Christian liberty an 
excuse for licence. Of. Eom. vi. 1, 1 Peter ii. 16. 

dpvov|jLvoi. Perhaps by teaching, as many Gnostics did, that Jesus 
was a mere man upon whom a heavenly spirit, Christ, descended 
at His baptism, leaving Him before or at the Passion. (In the 
apocryphal Gospel of Peter the cry of our Lord on the Cross is 
given in this form, "My Power, My Power, why hast thou forsaken 
me?") Or else by the doctrine that the God of creation (6 /j.6vo$ 
dea^Tvjs) was not the supreme God. 

5. Jude's first example of sin and punishment is not used in 
2 Peter, probably because it seemed too vague and obscure. It is 
indeed somewhat difficult. The general sense is like that of the 
passage 1 Cor. x. 1 11. In that we are reminded how Israel was 
delivered, and nourished in the wilderness (1 4) ; and how for all 
that they sinned and were punished (511). The same theme recurs 
over and over again in Ps. Ixxviii. The special sin which Jude has in 
mind seems to be Israel's want of faith when the spies brought back 
reports of the Promised Land (rods w Trurrewrai'Tas). But no good 
explanation of the words rb Sevrepov has been suggested. They are 
less emphatic, and therefore less awkward, if we are allowed to read 
(with X 68 and several versions) Ktpios aira.% \abv (rc6(ras. With the 
text before us I see no other reasonable rendering but to take T& 
detrepov as simply equivalent to tiffrepov, "afterwards": but no 
authority has been cited for such a use. There are other points of 
uncertainty about the text of this verse which it is worth while to 
note : for e6ras a7ra TT&VTO. NKL and others read eld. vftas (which 
Mayor adopts), B has eiS. u/ias ct7ra and for Ki/pios (read by KCKL etc.) 
AB 13 and four versions read 'I-rjcrovs (see further Introd.). This was 
interpreted by some Fathers, e.g. Jerome, as signifying Joshua (who, 
of course, in Greek and Latin is called Jesus). But the subject of 
both this and the next verse is the same, and Joshua cannot be the 
subject of v. 6. If Jude did write 'Irjo-ovs, it was not without a 
recollection of Joshua. The identity of name appealed to many 
early Christian writers. 

6. On the source see Introd. p. xlvii. 

7. SJJLOIOV TOVTOIS, i.e. the false teachers. 

8. plvroi, however, " in spite of these warnings " (Mayor). 
lvvirviaj;ofivoi. This probably refers to the pretended revelations 

of the false teachers, who laid claim to a special inspiration. Cf. 
Deut. xiii. 1. In what follows, Jude sums up their conduct : they 
are of loose life, and rebellious against constituted authority. See on 
2 Peter ii. 10. 

12] NOTES 39 

9. For the matter see Introd. p. xli. 

KpCeriv P\ao-<|>T]fuas = jSXd(r077,i4oi' Kpicrtv 2 Pet. ii. 11 (of. James i. 25 
aKpoaTTjs ^iriXrja-fjLovijs) not "an accusation of blasphemy," but cf. 
Field ad loc. 

10. Corresponds to 2 Peter ii. 12 but in that place is differently 
turned. Here 0im/cws means by instinct : and it is said of the false 
teachers that they come to ruin (<f>$etpovTai) by means of the 
knowledge and that a contemptible sort of knowledge which they 
possess, while they speak evil of what they do not understand 
perhaps primarily of the spiritual world 6as /SXacrc^oOo-ij' v. 8. 

11. Of the three examples of sin punished which Jude uses 2 Peter 
only adopts one, Balaam. Cain is perhaps chosen as an instance of 
one who defied the simplest and most obvious laws of God by murder, 
or else as having consulted only his own natural instincts in choosing 
an offering for God. Balaam is chosen as having prostituted the 
prophetic gift for gain (and the false teachers made money one of 
their objects). Korah rebelled against divinely appointed authority. 

The phrase used of Balaam is not lucid. ir\&vr) is susceptible of 
two meanings, active, in the sense of deceiving others, and passive, 
in the sense of being deceived. text6ri<rcu> is used of indulging un- 
restrainedly in pleasure : Ecclus. xxxvii. 29 ^ ticxvdrjs <?TT' idefffidruv. 
The whole sentence may be paraphrased : they have let themselves go 
in the deceiving course of Balaam, for gain. We learn what is meant 
by the deceit of Balaam from Rev. ii. 14 "thou hast there some that 
hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balak to put a stumbling 
block before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols 
and to commit fornication." The laxity of the false teachers is here 
again in Jude's mind. 

12. ovroC cwriv recurs again in vv. 16, 19. As Dr Chase has 
remarked, it is a favourite phrase in Apocalyptic writings. The seer 
is shown something and asks what it is? his guide usually an 
angel introduces his explanation by these or like words, cf. Zech. 
(i. 10 etc.), Eev. vii. 14, among Biblical passages. In each of the cases 
where Jude uses it we may fairly suspect that he is alluding to a passage 
of some writing. He is certainly doing so in v. 16, and as I think 
also in v. 19. In these two places he quotes the Assumption of Moses ; 
perhaps he is doing so in v. 12 also : we cannot be certain, for the 
book is mutilated. 

d-ycurais, the right reading here. It is the only mention in the 
N.T. under this name of the love-feasts, which were universally 
so called a little later. We hear of the germ of this Christian feast, 
as distinct from the Eucharist, in Acts iii. 46 KX&vrts re /car' O!KOV 

40 ST JUDE [12 

Aprov, and of the abuses and confusion which sometimes occurred in 
connexion with it, in 1 Cor. xi. 18 sqq. At first it was a meal for all 
members of the Christian community and was celebrated immediately 
after the Eucharist. In later times it was separated therefrom by an 
interval of some length. Gradually it came to be regarded as a 
charitable provision for the poorer members of the congregation. 

o-iriXdSes. 2 Peter has in the corresponding place cnri\oi, which 
certainly means spots or stains. The ordinary meaning of o-TriXds is 
v^aXos Trtrpa, a sunken rock. In a late, perhaps fourth century, 
hexameter poem on the virtues of precious stones, attributed to 
Orpheus, and called the Lithica, there is a description of the agate as 
KardffTiKTos o-7riXd,5eo-<rtv (1. 614) mottled with spots, and the Lexicon 
of Hesychius (which may be dependent on this passage of Jude) gives 
<T7riX<5es = /Lte/iia07^j'(K. These two passages (coupled with 2 Peter) 
constitute all the evidence at present available for rendering 
<nnXd5es here as "spots." But the evidence of 2 Peter is rather 
strong and that of the Lithica (a pagan composition) quite clear. 
I incline to accept it. 

lavToiis iroifiaCvovres. Ezek. xxxix. 8 (Westcott and Hort) 4960x17- 
crav ol Trot/i^es eairrotfs. 

The similes employed by Jude in vv. 12, 13 are these : 

Stains (or rocks). Waterless clouds. Barren trees. Waves. 

Wandering stars: 
and those in 2 Peter are : 

Stains. Waterless springs. Driven mists. 

ve4>e'Xcu K.r.X. The clouds are not only useless but purposeless, 
driven about by winds. Jude accumulates attributes, both here and 
in the next clause. 

4>0tvoTra>pivct. Mayor has carefully investigated the use of this 
word (which A.V. renders "(trees) whose fruit withereth," E.V. 
rightly "autumn trees") and shows that the word comes from 
<t>Qu>6Trwpov, late autumn. This is the time when we expect to find 
fruit on trees, and therefore the adjective must be taken with the 
next word aKap-rra : the trees have no fruit at the season when they 
ought to have it, like the barren fig tree in the Gospels. 

8ls diroOavovTct : twice dead : applying to the men rather than the 
trees. The men are twice dead because they were once dead in sin 
before baptism and have fallen away from the truth since baptism. 

13. KvjwtTa K.r.X. Cf. Isa. Ivii. 20. "The wicked are like the 
troubled sea when it cannot rest, whose waters cast up mire and dirt " 

erra<j>povTa, casting up their own shame, exposing it, as the sea 

22] NOTES 41 

casts up refuse on the beach. Moschus Idyll, v. 5 (a 8e 6d\affffa 
Kvprbv tircKpplfr)) is the only author quoted for the rare verb. 

do-r^pts irXavrJTai, on this see Introd. p. xlvii. 

ols 6 d<J>os /c.r.X. Notice that these words are applied in 2 Peter 
with far less appropriateness to the waterless springs and driven 

14, 15. On the quotation from Enoch see Introd. p. xlvi. 

16. Largely from the Assumption of Moses : see Introd. pp. xliv, xlv. 

17. We find several examples in N.T. (e.g. Acts xx. 29, 1 Tim. iv., 
2 Tim. iii. etc.) of predictions of false teaching and wickedness in the 
Christian body, but not of mockers, as here. Jude need not be re- 
ferring to a written document, but to a spoken warning often uttered 
(t\eyoi>) by the Apostles. But see above on 2 Peter iii. 3. The 
mockers, teaching as they did the lawfulness of many lax practices, 
would deride those who held the stricter view. 

19. diro8iopfl;ovTs, making distinction, saying "stand aside, touch 
me not : I am holier than thou." In the Introd. p. xlv I suggest 
that this again is an allusion to the Assumption of Moses. The false 
teachers would claim possession of special knowledge in divine things. 

\J/UX>KO, sensual. 1 Cor. ii. 14 a ^i^i/cds avdpuiros does not receive 
the things of the Spirit of God, xv. 44 awelpeTai cr&fjia \f>vxtK6v, eyeiperai 
(TcS/ia Trvev^aTiKdv. James iii. 15 speaks of a wisdom which is tirlyeios, 
\pvxiK-ri, daifj.oj>i68i)s. There it is definitely the opposite of irvev- 

irvevfia ^ lxvTS, though doubtless they claimed to possess it in a 
special degree. 

20. 6iroiKo8oji.ovvT6s... < TC<rTi. Polycarp's letter to the Philippians 
(iii. 2) seems to contain a reminiscence of this (Bigg and Mayor). 
" If you study the epistles of the blessed Apostle Paul, 5vvT)dJi<re<r0e 
olicodofji.e'iffOai ds TTJV 8odei<rav vjjuv iriariv." St Paul often uses the 
metaphor of building, notably in Eph. ii. 20 sqq. The solidarity of 
the brotherhood is contrasted with the divisions introduced by the 

irfcrm, used very much as in v. 3. 

Iv Trvevjiari cryiw < irpo(rev)(d|xvoi, cf. Eph. vi. 18 Trpotreu^/uej/oi 4v 
iravrl Kaipi^ iv irveij/jiaTi. 

21. irpo<r8exoH l6vot TO \os as Symeon in Luke ii. 25. Cf. Titus 
ii. 13 irpocrdex^voi. ryv paKaplav t\irlda K.T.\. 

22, 23. He abruptly returns to the thought of the false teachers 
suggested perhaps by the words eauroi>s r^p^a-are, "keep yourselves." 
"And what about your relation to others? what is your duty to 

42 ST JUDE [22 

I have discussed the reading in Introd. pp. Ivi, Ivii, and prefer that 
which gives three clauses. 

22. ovs (i-^v eXtyxere SiaKptvojxcvovs. A.V. reads 8ia.Kptv6fjievot and 
translates "making a difference" which is only correct as a rendering 
of dicLKptvovres. 5ia.Kpiv6fj.evos in James i. 6 means "wavering, 
doubting," and this gives a good sense here. "Some you must 
convince when they are wavering." The alternative rendering is " when 
they dispute with you," and this has support from v. 9 of this 

oOs de <rwT IK irvpos dpirdovrs. The idea is that of a brand 
plucked out of the burning, which occurs in Amos iv. 11 (coupled 
with a reference to Sodom and Gomorrah: cf. Jude 7) and also in 
Zech. iii. 2 of the High Priest Joshua (cf. Jude 9, where the words 
eirLTifji-fj<r(i(. 001 KI//HOS are taken by Westcott and Hort as referring to 
the same verse in Zech.). 

23. ofls 8* lAedre Iv <J>o(3u>, [uo-ovvrcs K.T.\. In the reference to the 
garment there may be again a recollection of Zech. iii., where the 
High Priest is clad in filthy garments. 

The threefold division marks a growth of danger. The first class 
of those who have come under the influence of the false teachers are 
waverers. These the faithful are to dispute with, and convince. The 
next are in the fire and must be snatched out. The third cannot be 
touched without danger : perhaps all that can be done is to pity 

24. 25. The beautiful ending of the Epistle grows naturally out of 
the preceding words. The thought of the fate that attends those 
who have gone astray leads to a prayer that the faithful may be 
preserved in their faith. Compare the opening words with Bom. 
xvi. 25. 

dirrafrrTous only here in N.T., but the verb trralu occurs in 2 Peter 
i. 10 06 M TrTaia-TfjTe Trore in a very similar connexion : also in James 
ii. 10, iii. 2. 

o*rf]<rat Karevwiriov K.T.\. The thought of Col. i. 22 is very like 
this : wapaffTijcrai u/ias aytovs Kal d/u(i)fj.ovs Kal dveyKXtfrovs KarevuTriov 
atfrou, ft ye ^Tri/i^ere rfj Triffrei. Compare also Eph. i. 4 elvai ^/ias 
ayLovs Kal d/xw/ious KarevdiTnov atfroO ev ayd-n-g. These two passages 
certainly the last refer to the present life. Jude is speaking of the 

v aYaXXido-ei. The substantive occurs in the Greek fragment of 
Enoch, v. 2 " the years of their joy TrXT/tfw^o-erai ev dya\\id(rei." 

25. |iova> 0{> <rttTTJpi r\\i<av, cf. rbv fibvov de<rir6T-r}v v. 4, Eom. xvi. 27. 
Qebs ffw/ip occurs in the Magnificat Luke i. 47 and in 1 Tim. i. 1, 

25] NOTES 43 

ii. 3, iv. 10. thy perhaps emphasized because false teachers held 
that the God of the Jews, the Creator, was distinct from the true God. 

8id 'I. X. (cf. Kom. i. 8) is best taken with what follows, "glory 
to God through Jesus Christ," not "God, our Saviour through Jesus 
Christ." In 1 Pet. iv. 11 it is said " that God may in all things be 
glorified through Jesus Christ." 

[xe-yaXwcrvvT] occurs several times in the Greek fragment of Enoch 
but in N.T. only in Heb. i. 3 " sat down on the right hand of the 
majesty on high. " 

eou(Ka, cf. Rev. xii. 10 dpri tyfrero 77 ffWTijpla Kal i] dtivajus Kal ij 
fiaffiXeia TOV deov ijfj.u>v Kal 17 tov<ria TOV xpwrov avTov, which however 
is a statement of what has happened, not an ascription of praise. 
It does not occur elsewhere in doxologies (Mayor), though ftifra/us 
and l<?xvs do. 

irpo iravros TOV alwvos stands by itself : we have irpb TU>V aidvuv in 
1 Cor. ii. 7, and in Prov. viii. 23 Wisdom says " God founded me irpb 

TOV O/cD^OS." 

eis iravras TOVS alwvas again is a unique variant of the ordinary els 
rovs alwvas T& 



Ahikar, story of 28 
Angels, erring xlvii 
Apocalypse, see Baruch, Peter 
Apocalyptic literature xxxii 
Apocryphal Books xivsqq., xxvi, 

xxxii, xl sqq. 
Aristides, Apology xviii 
Athenagoras xxxix 

Baruch, Apocalypse of Iviii 
Bigg, Dr C. vi and notes passim 
Bradshaw, H. Iv 
Brotherhood 12 

Caleb xliii sqq. 
Carpocratians li n. 
Cassiodorus xviii 
Ceriani xlii 
Cerinthus xlix 
Charles, B. H. xlii, xlv 
Chase, Dr xx, xxxviii, 36, 39 
Cleanthes 37 
Clement of Kome 16, 29 
"2nd Epistle" 29, 35 
Clement of Alexandria xviii, 

Deissmann, Dr xxv n. 
Demas and Hermogenes In 
De Zwaan liii, Iv, Ivi, 30 
Didache xxxviii 
Domitian xxxvii 

Egyptian versions liv, 10 
Eldad and Medad, Book of 29 
Enoch, Book of xiv, xlv sqq. 
Epistles, study of ix, x 
Esdras, 4th Book 17 
Eusebius xviii, xix, xxxix 

False teachers in 2 P. and Jude 

xlviii sqq. 
Field, Dr 14 
Fire, Destruction of the world 

by 30, 34 
Firmilian xix 

Gnostics 1 
Grotius xxi 

Hegesippus xxxvii 

Heresy and Heretics xlviii sqq., 


Hermas, Shepherd of 13 
Hippolytus xviii 
Hort, Dr Iv sqq. 
Hymenaeus and Philetus lii 
Book of 35 

Ignatius 10 
Irenaeus xxi 

James, in N.T. 36 
Jerome xix 
John, Acts of 1 

relation to 2 P. xxv 

quoted 9, 17 
Joshua xliii, 12, 38 
Jude, Ep. of 

connexion with 2 P. x 

explanation of xii 

author xxxvii 

descendants of xxxvii 

date xxxvii 

external evidence xxxix 

contents xxxix 

false teachers in xlviii 

use of apocryphal writings 



Jude, Ep. of continued 
MSS. and Versions liii 
corruptions in text liv sqq. 
Text 6 
Notes 36 

Latin Versions xx 
Levi, Testament of 16 
Lyons and Vienne, Letter of 
Churches xviii 

Maccahees, 3rd Book of 22 
Manuscripts liii 

Vatican (B) xx 
Mark, origin of Gospel 15 
Mayor, J. B. vi, xxii sqq., xxx, 

notes passim 
Methodius xix 
Michael xliii sq. 
Millennium 31 
Moschus 40 
Moses, Assumption of xiv, xv, 

xli sqq., 24, 41 
Muratorian Canon xxi, xxxviii 

Nicolaitanes 1, li 

Origen xix, xxxix 
Orpheus Lithica 40 
Orphic mysteries xxvii, 28 

Pastoral Epistles li 
Paul, Acts of lii 
allusion to Paul in 2 P. xxviii, 


Perpetua, Passion of xxi 

Acts of xxxi, 17 
Apocalypse of xviii, xxvi sqq., 

17, 23, 31 
Gospel of xxx, 38 
Legend of Domine quo vadis 15 
Preaching of xxx, 16 
1st Epistle, relation to 2 P. 

xxi sqq. 
2nd Epistle 

connexion with Jude x, xii 
external evidence xix 

Peter, 2nd Epistle continued 

relation to 1 P. xxii 

to other writings, Josephus, 
etc. xxv 

vocabulary xxii 

date xxvii 

is it a forgery? xxxii 

contents xxxiv 

corruptions in text 

false teachers in xlviii 

Text 1 

Notes 9 
Philo xxv, 34 
Philoxenian Syriac xx 
Plato 11 
Polycarp, Ep. and Martyrdom 

xxxvii, 41 
Polycrates 32 
Prophecy, 17, 18 

Babbinic citations 24, 29 

Sahidic version liv, 10 

Samael xliii sq. 

Sibylline oracles 22, 32, 34, 35 

Simon 9 

Simon Magus xlix 

Solomon, Psalms of 24 

Wisdom of xxvii 
Stars, erring xlvii 
Stoic view of the end of the 

world, 34 

Stratonicea, inscription at xxv n. 
Symeon 9 
Syriac versions xx, liii 

Tertullian xxi, xxxix 
Theophilus of Antioch xviii, 

Versions xx, xxxix, liii 
Vienne and Lyons, Letters of 
Churches xviii 

Zechariah 42 

Zoker and James, descendants of 
Jude xxxvii 



Return to desk from which borrowed. 
This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 

OCr 2 5 1952 LU 


(WAY 14 

... .TACKS 

APR 1 9 1960 

LD 21-95m-ll,'50(2877sl6)476 

ftEC'D LD 

25 1960 

YB 70/38